Skip to main content Accessibility help

Economic Scenario Generators and Solvency II

  • E. M. Varnell


The Solvency II Directive mandates insurance firms to value their assets and liabilities using market consistent valuation. For many types of insurance business Economic Scenario Generators (ESGs) are the only practical way to determine the market consistent value of liabilities. The directive also allows insurance companies to use an internal model to calculate their solvency capital requirement. In particular, this includes use of ESG models. Regardless of whether an insurer chooses to use an internal model, Economic Scenario Generators will be the only practical way of valuing many life insurance contracts. Draft advice published by the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) requires that insurance firms who intend to use an internal model to calculate their capital requirements under Solvency II need to comply with a number of tests regardless of whether the model (or data) is produced internally or is externally sourced. In particular the tests include a ‘use test’, mandating the use of the model for important decision making within the insurer. This means that Economic Scenario Generators will need to subject themselves to the governance processes and that senior managers and boards will need to understand what ESG models do and what they don't do. In general, few senior managers are keen practitioners of stochastic calculus, the building blocks of ESG models. The paper therefore seeks to explain Economic Scenario Generator models from a non-technical perspective as far as possible and to give senior management some guidance of the main issues surrounding these models from an ERM/Solvency II perspective.


Corresponding author

Contact address E. M. Varnell, MSc. F.I.A., KPMG LLP, 15 Canada Square, London, E14 5GL, UK. Tel: +44(0)20-7311-5043; Fax: +44(0)20-7694-2340. E-mail:


Hide All
Artzner, P., Delbaen, J., Heath, D. (1999). Coherent Measures of Risk. Available at:
Board for Actuarial Standards (2009). Modelling: Exposure Draft. Available at:
Brooks, D., Care, R.J., Chaplin, M.B., Kaufman, A.M., Morgan, K.A., Roberts, D.N., Skinner, J.M.E., Huntington-Thresher, D.J.K., Tuley, P.J., Wong, D.L. (2009). Actuarial Aspects of Internal Models for Solvency II. Forthcoming in British Actuarial Journal, 15(II).
CEIOPS Consultation Papers on Level 2 Implementing Measures (2009). Available at:
Deighton, S.P., Dix, R.C., Graham, J.R., Skinner, J.M.E. (2009). Governance and Risk Management in United Kingdom Insurance Companies. Forthcoming in British Actuarial Journal, 15(III).
Frankland, R., Smith, A.D., Wilkins, T., Varnell, E.M., Holtham, A., Biffis, E., Eshun, S., Dullaway, D. (2009). Modelling Extreme Market Events: a report of the benchmarking stochastic models working party. British Actuarial Journal, 15, 99217.
Hibbert, J., Kirchner, A., Kretzschmar, G., Li, R., McNeil, A. (2009). Liquidity Premium Literature Review. Available at:
Sheldon, T.J., Smith, A.D. (2004). Market Consistent Valuation of Life Assurance Business. British Actuarial Journal, 10(3), 543626.
Standard and Poors (2007). Criteria, Insurance General, Summary of Standard & Poor's Enterprise Risk Management Evaluation Process for Insurers. Available at:
Wilkie, A.D., Waters, H.R., & Yang, S.Y. (2003). Reserving, Pricing and Hedging for Policies with Guaranteed Annuity Options. British Actuarial Journal, 9(2), 263425.
Wilmott, P. (2001). Introduces Quantitative Finance. Available at:



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed