Is actuarial qualification worth it now in US? And within 10-20 years?

Are professionals in actuarial roles disadvantaged without qualification?

Which background’s (Physics, Math, ActSc, Ec,…) are mostly advantaged/disadvantaged by the qualification?

I think there’s a real disadvantage right now. I know many companies are willing to hire data scientists to do analyst work, but are more hesitant when it comes to leadership positions. That might change in 10-20 years, but right now it might be hard to get a job as an actuarial manager without credentials.

That being said, for duties that don’t necessarily require actuarial knowledge, those without credentials that also aren’t taking exams have more time to dedicate to learning new skills to improve their current job function. I would list that as a potential advantage, so it depends on your personal career goals.

Progressive has done very well and doesn’t seem to care much about actuarial qualifications.

1 Like

The end has been predicted for decades.
Yes, data science is coming. But actuaries do waaaay more than data science.
Do data scientists know about long tail risks? maybe. as much as actuaries? Maybe not. So they need to learn that.
Regulatory and tax stuff, data scientists need to learn that.
Reporting requirements and regulations, need to learn.
Product design and marketing, they don’t teach that at the academy.
IBNR’s, reserves, APV. They need to learn all that.

And when they learn all that they’re not data scientists, they’re actuaries. Or, data scientists are generalists, and the insurance world is complex enough that they require specialists. Heck, they even have multiple different types of specialists, different societys, different branches in the societies.

If I was working as an actuary, I wouldn’t be concerned about it. And if I was, in 10-20 years I’d expect that I’d be high enough up the management ladder that I wouldn’t be competing with data scientists anyway.

1 Like

I am used to think at the actuary as a technician of stochastic models, but for this stuff Physicists are (maybe) better prepared and don’t need a ‘paper’.

I agree with you. Whoever knows about regulatory, reporting, product design and reserving. He/she is an actuary. Period.

Maybe the importance of the actuarial qualification will increase thanks to the Data science.

Companies are always going to need actuaries to sign off on product filings, annual rate certifications, etc. Not to mention the financials. The question is, will they need as many in the future as they have in the past.

1 Like

I’d view it more from this angle: As the potential for data analysis has grown over the past few decades, there has been an increasing demand for actuaries.

However, it’s reasonable to wonder if that demand might flatten out, as that growth translates to a demand for data scientists and other geeks, rather than just actuaries per sé.