← The collection

Insurance Deductibles.

Trade premium cost against retained loss and compare expected wealth with a utility benchmark.

Interactive experimentintuitiveField note ·
INTERACTIVE EXPERIMENT / P53

Insurance Deductibles

Trade premium cost against retained loss and compare expected wealth with a utility benchmark.

TEST THE MECHANISM

A fictional household starts with wealth 100 and has a 25% chance of a loss of 40. Choose a deductible; insurance covers loss above it. The premium is expected claim cost plus a selected loading.

040
050
Two-state wealth after premium
StateProbabilityRemaining wealth
No loss0.7595.00
Loss0.2575.00
Premium
5.00
Expected final wealth
90.00
Certainty equivalent under log utility
89.55

At fair pricing, expected wealth remains 90 while a risk-averse log-utility benchmark values reduced variability. Log utility, fixed risk and enforceable claims are assumptions, not a description of your preferences or an insurance recommendation.

Loss probability, payment enforcement and log utility are supplied assumptions. Exclusions, limits, changing behaviour and real contracts are omitted; no personal insurance recommendation is made.

THE SHORT VERSION

Insurance Deductibles, explained.

An insurance deductible is the portion of an eligible loss retained by the policyholder before the specified cover pays.

01 / THE MECHANISM

Why it happens

Initial wealth one hundred faces a quarter probability of losing forty. Premium equals expected indemnity times one plus a loading; two-state expected wealth and a log-utility certainty equivalent are computed separately.

An insurance deductible is the portion of an eligible loss retained by the policyholder before the specified cover pays.

Read the result

Expected final wealth and the log-utility certainty equivalent are different evaluations of the same two-state outcomes.

02 / FOLLOW IT THROUGH

A worked example

Compare fair insurance with retaining the entire loss

  1. Set premium loading zero and deductible forty to inspect uninsured wealth one hundred or sixty.

  2. Reduce deductible to zero, yielding a fair premium ten and wealth ninety in either state.

  3. Compare unchanged expected wealth ninety with the changed certainty equivalent under the stated risk-averse utility benchmark.

OPTIONAL DEEPER DETAILGo deeper: inside the model

Inside this model

Initial wealth one hundred faces a quarter probability of losing forty. Premium equals expected indemnity times one plus a loading; two-state expected wealth and a log-utility certainty equivalent are computed separately.

03 / BEYOND THE EXPERIMENT

Where this idea is useful

A practical use

Distinguish a reduction in expected cost from a reduction in financial variability.

CHECK YOUR INTUITION

A common misconception

THE TEMPTING CONCLUSION

“Equal expected wealth means every risk preference must be indifferent.”

THE MORE USEFUL DISTINCTION

A risk-averse utility function can value reduced variability even when average wealth is unchanged; different preferences or costs change the comparison.

What this explanation leaves out

  • Loss probability, payment enforcement and log utility are supplied assumptions. Exclusions, limits, changing behaviour and real contracts are omitted; no personal insurance recommendation is made.
ONE MORE QUESTION

Is log utility a measurement of my insurance preferences?

No. It is a supplied benchmark, with no personal calibration, real contract analysis or recommendation.

TAKE THE IDEA WITH YOU

Are you optimising expected money, a utility criterion or a constraint on a possible loss?

Associated thinkers

Associated withKenneth Arrow ↗

Associations marked provisional are awaiting source review.

Further reading

Explore the original research or the teaching reference behind this experiment.