IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/astinb/v56y2026i3p_19.html

A smooth hazard-blend composite model for heavy-tailed loss data: Bayesian and frequentist comparisons with applications in actuarial science

Author

Listed:
  • Lamba, Mohit
  • Kapoor, Harmanpreet Singh

Abstract

Accurate modeling of the loss distributions is crucial for solvency capital assessment and reinsurance pricing. Conventional single-component models fail to capture the dual nature of insurance data, which consists of a high-frequency body and a heavy tails of extreme losses. This paper introduces a novel composite Weibull–Pareto model with a smooth logistic transition in the hazard rates by avoiding discontinuities. We compare frequentist (maximum likelihood) and the Bayesian estimation using weakly informative and empirical priors to assess parameter uncertainty and tail risk. Using the canonical Danish Fire Insurance dataset, the results indicate that Bayesian inference delivers superior predictive performance and conservative estimates of the extreme tail-risk measures such as Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Tail Value-at-Risk (TVaR). Maximum likelihood estimates appear overly optimistic, whereas the Bayesian methods yield more credible capital and reinsurance payouts, particularly for the catastrophic layers. The proposed hazard blend offers a robust framework for actuaries, enhancing both methodological rigor and practical applicability in the composite loss modeling.

Suggested Citation

  • Lamba, Mohit & Kapoor, Harmanpreet Singh, 2026. "A smooth hazard-blend composite model for heavy-tailed loss data: Bayesian and frequentist comparisons with applications in actuarial science," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(3), pages -19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:astinb:v:56:y:2026:i:3:p:_19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S051503612610110X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:astinb:v:56:y:2026:i:3:p:_19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/asb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.