Results simulation of technical provision (relative to best estimate) Interest 3% Males OAP Standard deviation Quantiles 50% 95% 97.50% 99.5% SP OAP + SP OAP Females SP OAP + SP 2.2% 1.7% 1.4% 1.8% 2.1% 1.4% 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 99.9% 100.0% 99.9% 103.5% 102.8% 102.2% 102.8% 103.5% 102.3% 104.2% 103.4% 102.7% 103.4% 104.2% 102.7% 105.5% 104.4% 103.4% 104.2% 105.6% 103.4% Table 9.1 Results simulation of provisions at 3% interest for model portfolios (males and females average) Bij 1% rekenrente is de spreiding in de resultaten groter. Uitkomsten simulatie VPV (in verhouding tot de best estimate) Interest 1% Males OAP Standard deviation Quantiles 50% 95% 97.50% 99.5% SP OAP + SP OAP Females SP OAP + SP 2.6% 2.0% 1.7% 2.2% 2.7% 1.8% 99.9% 100.0% 99.9% 99.9% 100.0% 99.9% 104.2% 103.3% 102.8% 103.5% 104.4% 102.9% 105.1% 104.0% 103.3% 104.2% 105.3% 103.5% 106.7% 105.3% 104.3% 105.3% 107.1% 104.4% Table 9.2 Results simulation of provisions at 3% interest for model portfolios (males and females average) The distribution that ensues from the simulations strongly resembles a normal distribution. As demonstrated in the tables above, the spread in the separate benefits is much higher than in the OAP and SP combination, especially in the old age pensions for men and survivor’s pensions for women. As an example graph 9.3 shows the distribution of simulated values for OAP, SP and the combination of both around the best estimate. The model portfolio is male average and the interest rate is 3%. Please note that the distributions shown are not entirely regular due to the inherent simulation uncertainty at 10,000 simulations. Projection Table AG2018 Applications of the model 32
34 Online Touch Home