arXiv:2106.06982v1 [math.PR] 13 Jun 2021 082//T/05,2019-2022. 2018/29/B/ST1/00756, qainta ebrSi ucinsle.I Sections In Sect In solves. respectively. asymptotics, function subexponential Cram´er and Gerber-Shiu Section that function. equation Gerber-Shiu of representations though. u here the required with is results key few ordering by the introduced is matrices goal scale probability so-called main Parisian of Second the modulate of In Markov goal. asymptotics yet. the subexponential first proved for a been give Theorem not also Arfwedson has We that of facts counterpart new give additional few with and [ [ h atscini eiae oPrsa unprobability. ruin p Parisian ruin to dedicated finite-time is the section of last H¨oglund’s approximations The and Segerdahl’s on Section In matrices. scale of version modulated Markov a as treated then be in can presented paper the of of VII Chap. see deep; also is process risk modulated Markov ikpoesta ewr ih nSection In with. work we that process risk ujc fmn neetsneLnbr.Teei odda fw of e.g. see deal it; good describing a books great is many There there and mathemat Lundberg. theory this since insurance interest for many substantial of is subject theory risk The vironment. 2010 2010 hswr sprilyspotdb oihNtoa Science National Polish by supported partially is work This tl,w eiv htteei edo h hr uvyrltdwt t with related survey short the of need a is there that believe we Still, 2010 Date h ae sognzda olw.I h etscinw omlyintr formally we section next the In follows. as organized is paper The hspprcnen h unpoaiiisi h otx frgm sw regime of context the in probabilities ruin the concerns paper This UNPOAIIISFRRS RCS NAREGIME A IN PROCESS RISK FOR PROBABILITIES RUIN ]. ], ue1,2021. 15, June : ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics osie al. et Rolski Keywords. distributio time. size vario ruin claim for the a of process and versions risk few reserves initial modulated horizon, Markov time a for probabilities Abstract. totics Kyprianou ‹ uepnnildistribution subexponential nti ae egv e xrsin n smttc fruin of asymptotics and expressions few give we paper this In untime ruin [ WTHN ENVIRONMENT SWITCHING 1999 [ 2013 4 ], ‹ epeettekycmesto oml n related and formula compensation key the present we Kyprianou BGIWPALMOWSKI ZBIGNIEW asymptotics .Det akvmdlto,sm diinlcare additional some modulation, Markov to Due ]. 1. Introduction ‹ rmr 02;Scnay6K5 91B30. 60K05, Secondary 60K20; Primary 1 eta ii Theorem Limit Central ‹ vnv n Palmowski and Ivanovs [ 2013 hneo measure of change 3 egv e anfcscnenn the concerning facts main few give we .Teudrtnigo so-called of understanding The ]. 5 ieteodnr differential ordinary the give .W loconsider also We n. 6 ‹ susnadAlbrecher and Asmussen susnadAlbrecher and Asmussen and srgmso a of regimes us Cram´er asymp- ions eteGatNo. Grant Centre 7 [ c n a been has and ics 2012 8 r eae with related ork epeetthe present we ikprocess. risk d and atclr we particular, hsi our is This . .Ti part This ]. eeresults hese oefacts some thn en- itching 9 robability. dc the oduce ie use nified efocus we 2 Z. Palmowski

2. Gerber-Shiu function The goal of this paper is to analyse various ruin probabilities of a Markov mod- ulated risk process. To describe this process properly we start from introducing random environment that is given by a continuous time Markov chain Jt living on the state space E : 1, 2,...N . Let Tk denote successive jump epochs of the “ t u Markov chain Jt. Then the risk process under consideration is given by

t Nt Jt JT ´,JT ´ p q p k k q (1) Xt x pJu du Ck Ck . “ ` 0 ´ ´ k 1 Tk t ż ÿ“ ÿő Above, x describes an initial capital, Nt is a Markov modulated Poisson process with an arrival intensity λi at time t when Jt i determining the arrival of i.i.d. i “ i claims Ckp q which are conditionally independent of Nt and having distribution FCp q dependingt onu the state i of the environmental Markov chain J at time t. Apart of ij it we have possible claims Ckp q appearing when the environmental Markov chain changes its state. The vector p1,p2,...,pN is a vector of premium intensities. p q Observe that Xt is a spectrally negative Markov Additive Process (MAP) with the matrix exponent

Cpiqα Cpijqα (2) F α diag piα λiEe´ qij Ee´ , p q“ ` ` p q ´ ¯ where α 0 and Q qij i,j E is an intensity matrix of J. In other words, ě “ p q P αXt F α t E e ; Jt e p q . r s“ In the following we assume that the processes X and J are defined on a common filtered probability space Ω, F, Ft t 0, P and we use Px,i to denote the law of p t u ě q X,J given X0 x, J0 i and by Pi we denote the law of X,J given J0 p q t “ “ u p q t “ i . The appropriate expectations we will denote by Ei and Ex,i. We also write u E Z; Jt , where Z is some random variable, to denote the N N matrix with r sE E P P ˆE E entries i Z; Jt j i Z1 Jt j . We denote 0 and 0 . We willr assume“ throughouts“ r t of“ thisus work the followingp¨q “ netp¨q profitr¨s condit “ ionr¨s

(3) Ex,iX1 0, for all i E, ą P under which risk process X tends to infinity a.s. The main object of the study is expected discounted penalty function (EDPF) called a Gerber-Shiu function as well and defined by

´ E qτ0 (4) φw,ij x x,i e´ w Xτ ´ , Xτ ´ ; Jτ ´ j, τ0´ p q“ r p 0 ´ | 0 |q 0 “ ă 8s for the ruin time

(5) τ0´ inf t 0 : Xt 0 . “ t ŕ ă u Above, q 0 is a discounting factor and w is a bivariate non-negative penalty function. Thisě function describes the penalty that is paid at the moment of ruin. It depends on the position prior ruin X ´ and the deficit X ´ at the ruin moment. τ0 | τ0 | If w 1 then Gerber-Shiu function is a´ discounted ruin probability: ” ´ qτ0 (6) φ1,ij Ex,i e´ ; J ´ j, τ0´ . “ r τ0 “ ă 8s The most common case is when q 0 and then “ φij x φ1,ij x p q“ p q Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 3 is the ruin probability. We will write φw,i x j E φw,ij x , φ1,i x j E φ1,ij x p q“ P ij p q p q“ P p q and φi x φij x . In most of the cases Cp q 0 for any i, j E, that is, p q “ j E p q ř ” Př when Markov chainP changes its state there are no additional claims appearing in reserve process.ř In this case

t Nt Jt (7) Xt x pJu du Ckp q, 0 “ ` ´ k 1 ż ÿ“ There is a huge amount of literature devoted to the Gerber-Shiu functions and ruin theory. For more detailed discussions, we can refer to Asmussen and Albrecher [2010], Rolski et al. [1999], Kyprianou [2013].

3. Prelimiaries We follow here mainly Ivanovs and Palmowski [2012]. Define an N N matrix- q ˆ valued function W p q x which is continuous for x 0 and is identified by the following Laplace transform:p q ě (8) 8 αx q 1 e´ W p q x dx F α qI ´ , α max Re λ : det F λ λqI 0 . 0 p q “ p p q´ q ą t p q p p q´ q“ u ż q The matrix W p q x is invertible for x 0 and satisfies p q ą qτ ` q q 1 (9) Ex e´ a ; τ ` τ0´,J ` W p q x W p q a ´ r x ă τa s“ p q p q for 0 x a, where ď ď τ ` : inf t 0 : Xt a . a “ t ě ą u In the case of N 1 this results corresponds to Kyprianou and Palmowski [2005, Thm. 1]. “ We also define x q αx αy q Zp q α, x e I e´ W p q y dy F α qI for α, q, x 0 p q“ ´ 0 p q p p q´ q ě ˆ ż ˙ and when α 0 we denote “ x q q (10) Zp q x I W p q y dy F 0 qI . p q“ ´ 0 p q p p q´ q ż It is so-called second scale matrix. We will also need a matrix R being a left solution of q F Rp q qI. p´ q“ In case when N 1 we have R Φ q where Φ q is a right-inverse of the Laplace exponent ψ α :“ F α of spectrally“´ p negativeq L´evyp q process X (hence ψ Φ q q). Then for allp x,q α“ 0p andq q 0 p p qq “ ´ ě ą qτ0 αX ´ 1 E ´ ` τ0 q q q q (11) x e ; τ0´ τa`,J ´ Zp q α, x W p q x W p q a ´ Zp q α, a . r ă τ0 s“ p q´ p q p q p q q Hence by taking a and assuming that Rp q αI is non-singular, it holds that Ñ `8 ` qτ ´ αX 0 τ´ q q q 1 Ex e´ ` 0 ; J ´ Zp q α, x W p q x Rp q αI ´ F α qI . r τ0 s“ p q´ p qp ` q p p q´ q Above result can be extended to q 0 by taking the limits as q 0. Moreover, it is q 1 “ qÓ noted that Rp q α ´ F α qI reduces to ψ α q α Φp q in the L´evy case. This leadsp to the` knownq p p identityq´ q with α 0p forp q´ a L´evyq{p process,´ q see Kyprianou [2006, Thm. 8.1]. “ 4 Z. Palmowski

We can consider process X killed on exiting positive half-line and the corre- sponding potential measure (a matrix of measures)

q 8 qt (12) U p q A e´ P Xt A; t τ0´,Jt dt, p q“ 0 r P ą s ż

q where A is a Borel set. It turns out that the measure U A has a density up q x on 0, with respect to Lebesgue measure and by Ivanovsp q [2014] it is givenp byq p `8q

q q Rpqq z q (13) up q z W p q x e W p q x z . p q“ p q ´ p ´ q

4. Compensation formula and Gerber-Shiu function Our first goal is to give various key representations of Gerber-Shiu function. We start from describing so-called compensation formula in the context of regime switching ruin probabilities. We define (non-homogeneous) marked Poisson measure

Nt

N ,t A δ pJ q A δ pJ ,J q A , C 0 T N Tk´ Tk pr qˆ q“ C k p q` Ck p q k 1 k Tk t ÿ“ ÿő

N where Tk are jumps epochs of the Poisson process Nt, δx is the Dirac measure at x and A is a Borel set. From Jacod and Shiryaev [2003, Def. II.1.20 and Prop. II.1.21] and C¸inlar [1972] it follows that

Js´,Js Js Js´,Js (14) νp q dy λJ F p q dy qJ ,J F p q dy p q“ s C p q` s´ s C p q is a compensator of NC , that is, for any measurable and bounded g we have

t t Js´,Js Ei g s,y,Js ,Js NC ds, dy Ei g s,y,Js ,Js νp q dy ds. 0 p ´ q p q“ 0 p ´ q p q ż ż

C N We denote by Tn the jump epoch of of the risk process (1), that is, is either Tk of Tn. This gives the following compensation formula.

Theorem 4.1. For any measurable and bounded function f : 0, 2 R E2 R we have r `8q ˆ ˆ Ñ

E C x,i f Tk ,XT C ,XT C ,JT C ,JT C » p k ´ k k ´ k qfi T C t kÿő – t fl 8 k,j Ex,i f s,Xs,Xs,Xs y,k,j dsνp q dy . 0 0 “ k,j E p ´ q p q ÿP ż ż Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 5

Proof. Note that

C E C C C x,i f Tk ,XT ,XT ,JTk ,JT » p k ´ k ´ k qfi T C t kÿő – fl JT C JT C ,JT C C p k q p k ´ k q Ex,i f T ,X C ,X C C 1 J J C 1 J J ,JT ,JT k Tk Tk k T C ´ T C k T C ´ T C k k “ » p ´ ´ ´ t k “ k u ´ t k ‰ k u ´ qfi T C t kÿő –t fl Ex,i f s,Xs ,Xs ,Xs y,Js ,Js NC ds, dy “ 0 p ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ q p q ż t 8 k,j Ex,i f s,Xs,Xs,Xs y,k,j dsνp q dy 0 0 “ k,j E p ´ q p q ÿP ż ż which completes the proof.  Corollary 4.1. We have y 8 q k,j φw,ij x w z,y z uikp q z x dz νp q dy , 0 0 p q“ k E p ´ q p ´ q p q ÿP ż ż q where up q x is a q-potential density of the process X starting at x and killed on exiting fromp q 0, . r `8q Proof. Observe that ruin can happen only at the moments of claim arrivals. Hence from Theorem 4.1,

8 qT C φw,i,j x Ex,i e´ k w X C , X C 1 0 0 T T XT C ,XT C ,JT C j k ´ k t k ´ě k ă k “ u p q“ «k 1 p | |q ff ÿ“ y 8 8 qs k,j E ´ x,i e´ w z,y z 1 X dz,τ s 1 Js´ k,Js j ds νp q dy 0 0 0 p ´ q s´ 0 t “ “ u p q k E ż ˆ „ż ż t P ą u ˙ ÿP y 8 8 qs k,j e´ w z,y z Px,i Xs dz, τ0´ s,Js k ds νp q dy . “ 0 0 0 p ´ q p ´ P ą ´ “ q p q k E ˆ„ ˙ ÿP ż ż ż This completes the proof. 

T Writing φw x φw,1 x ,...,φw,N x and using Fubbini theorem we can conclude thatp Corollaryq “ p 4.1p isq equivalentp toqq y 8 q φw x w z,y z up q z x dz ν dy p q“ 0 0 p ´ q p ´ q p q ż ż 8 8 q (15) w z,y up q z x ν z dy dz “ 0 0 p q p ´ q p ` q ż ż where the measure ν is defined formally in (14). Remark 4.1. For above considerations the downward jumps are not crucial and above corollary could be easily adopted for the general direction of jumps of the process X. Similar result was derived by Salah and Morales [2012] and Kyprianou [2013, Thm. V.5.5] in the context of spectrally negative L´evy processes. From Corollary 4.1 and (13) we have the first main result of this section. 6 Z. Palmowski

Theorem 4.2 (Compensation representation). We have

8 8 q φw x w z,y up q z ν z dy dz, p q“ 0 0 p q p q p ` q ż ż q where up q z is given in (13). p q From above Theorem 4.2 the following representation of the ruin probability (compare with Kyprianou [2013, Thm. IV.4.3]). Theorem 4.3 (Discounted ruin probability). We have, q q (16) φ1 x Zp q x W p q x CW ´1 Z , p q“ p q´ p q p8q p8q for q 1 q CW ´1Z lim W p q c ´ Zp q c . p8q p8q c “ Ñ8 p q p qă8 Note that (16) gives the Laplace transform of the finite-time ruin time, that is,

8 qt φ1 x e´ dPx τ0´ t . p q“ 0 p ő q ż In other words inverting (16) gives the finite-time ruin probability

(17) φ x, t Px τ0´ t . p q“ p ď q Multiplying by 1 from the right and taking q 0 in (16) gives the representation of the ruin probability. Indeed, note that Ó

φi x φ x 1 i Px,i τ0´ p q “ p px q q “ p ă 8q I1 W y dyF 0 1 W x CW ´1Z 1 i 1 W x CW ´1 Z 1 i. “ p ´ 0 p q p q ´ p q p8q p8q q “ ´ p p q p8q p8qq q ż Moreover, we have Z x 1 1. Let W limx W x . Introducing survival probability p q “ p8q “ Ñ`8 p q φ x 1 φi x ip q“ ´ p q we get the following its representation. Theorem 4.4 (Survival probability). Under net profit condition (3) we have 1 (18) φ x W x W ´ 1 i. ip q “ p p q p8q q Example 4.1. Let N 1. Then Q 0. Recall that “ “ 8 αx 1 e´ W x dx F α ´ . 0 p q “ p q ż In our case by (2),

1 1 1 F α ´ 1 1 1 p q “p1α αy 1 λ1EC1p q 8 e F p q y EC1p qdy ´ 0 ´ C p q{ k 1 8 k ş8 αy I, 1 ρ1 e´ FC p q dy “ p1α 0 p q k 1 ˆ ˙ ÿ“ ż where 1 λ1EC1p q ρ1 , “ p1 x I, 1 1 1 p q FC p q x 1 F C y dy, p q“ E 0 p q C1p q ż Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 7 for 1 1 F p q x 1 F p q x . C p q“ ´ C p q Thus 8 k I, 1 k W x ρ1 FC p q ˚ x , p q“ k 1 p q p q ÿ“ I, 1 k I, 1 where F p q ˚ denotes the kth convolution of distribution F p q. To sum up, p C q C 8 k I, 1 k φ1 x A1 ρ1 FC p q ˚ x p q“ k 1 p q p q ÿ“ for some constant A1. From the fact that limx φ1 x 1 we can get identify Ñ`8 p q “ constant A1 and derive the seminal Pollaczek-Khintchine formula for the survival probability. Theorem 4.5 (Pollaczek-Khintchine formula). If N 1 then “ 8 k I, 1 k φ1 x 1 ρ1 ρ1 FC p q ˚ x . p q “ p ´ q k 1 p q p q ÿ“ We denote by

ξk XT C XT C “ k´1 ´ k the negative of the increments of the risk process between consecutive jumps. Note that, conditionally on J C , random variables ξk are independent on each other. Tl Moreover, conditionally on JT C j, JT C i , ξk has the same law as t k “ k´1 “ u ´ λi i qij ij (19) piExp λi qii Ckp q Ckp q p ´ q´ λi qii ´ λi qii ´ ´ because waiting time for next jump has exponential law Exp λi qii with parameter p ´ q qij λi. Then we have to take into account which jump is first: the one coming from` Markov modulated Poisson process N or the one that Markov chain change of the state brings. In the first scenario Markov chain Jt remains in the state i. Note C C that the law of ξk depends on the states Jk 1 and Jk of the discrete-time Markov chain ´ C C J0 J0, Jk JT C , k 1, 2,... “ “ k “ with the transition matrix λi qij (20) P pij with pii and pij for i j. “ p q “ λi qii “ λi qii ‰ ´ ´ We define the following discrete-time Markov modulated random random walk: n (21) S0 0, Sn ξk. “ “ k 1 ÿ“ We recall the key observation that ruin of the risk process (7) only at the claim arrivals. By shifting a generic trajectory of Xt by x units downward and then reflecting it across the horizontal axis, we can observe that the risk process X gets below zero level if and only if Sk will ever cross level x. Moreover, the net profit condition (3) is equivalent to the requirements that Sn a.s. This gives us the last representation. Ñ `8 8 Z. Palmowski

Theorem 4.6 (Maximum random walk). We have

(22) φi x Pi max Sk x 1. p q“ k 0 ą ă ˆ ě ˙ Remark 4.2. Note that by enriching the state space to the pairs i, j E2 and by p qP taking the Markov chain J˜t Jt ,Jt , we can assume without loss of generality that the distribution of generic“ increment p ´ q ξ, depends only on the state of the Markov chain just prior jump. In this case X becomes so-called non-anticipative MAP. In other words, without loss of generality we can assume the distribution of ξ (being i the negative of r.v. given in (19)) can be indexed by F p q x . To simplify this ξ p q analysis we will assume from now on that this condition holds whenever we work with random walk Sn. In this case, denoting

i ai xFξp q dx “ R p q ż which we assume to be finite, the net profit condition (3) is equivalent to N (23) a πiai 0. “´ i 1 ą ÿ“ Remark 4.3. The representation (22) of the ruin probability via maximum random walk remains true even if the time between has a general distribution possibly depending on the discrete time Markov chain J C.

5. Ordinary differential equation In this section we derive ordinary differential equation for Gerber-Shiu functions. We start from proving some crucial martingale property. Theorem 5.7. For each i E, the processes: P ´ ` ´ ` qt τ0 τ q qt τ0 τ q e´ ^ ^ a W p q X ´ ` , e´ ^ ^ a Zp q X ´ ` iJ ´ ` t τ0 τa iJ ´ ` t τ0 τa t^τ0 ^τa p ^ ^ q t^τ0 ^τa p ^ ^ q are uniformly integrable martingales with respect of the natural filtration Ft of MAP X,J . p q Proof. From (9) and the strong Markov property it follows that

qτ ` E e´ a 1 ` ´ F ´ ` x,i τa τ0 ,J ` j t τ0 τa τa | „ t ă “ u ^ ^  ´ ` qt τ0 τ q q 1 a ´ ` e´ ^ ^ W p q X W p q a ´ J ´ ` j , iJ ´ ` t τ0 τa t^τ ^τ “ t^τ0 ^τa p ^ ^ qr p q s 0 a q q q 1 where we used the fact that W X ´ 0 and W X ` W a I. This p q τ0 p q τa p q ´ p q “ p q q p q 1 “ completes of the proof of the first martingale property since W p q a ´ J ´ ` j r p q s t^τ0 ^τa F is t τ ´ τ ` -measurable. ^ 0 ^ a Similarly, from (11) we have

´ qτ0 Ex,i e´ 1 ´ F ´ ` τ0 ,J ´ j t τ0 τa τ0 | „ t ă8 “ u ^ ^  ´ ` qt τ0 τ q q a ´ ` ´ ` e´ ^ ^ Zp q X W p q X AJ ´ ` j iJ ´ ` t τ0 τa iJ ´ ` t τ0 τa t^τ ^τ “ t^τ0 ^τa p q´ t^τ0 ^τa p q 0 a ˆ ^ ^ ^ ^ ˙ Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 9 for some matrix A. Using similar arguments as above we derive the martingale property of the second process.  From the compensation representation of the Gerber-Shiu function given in The- orem 4.2 we can conclude that ´ ` qt τ0 τ a ´ ` (24) e´ ^ ^ φw,i,J ´ ` Xt τ τ t^τ0 ^τa p ^ 0 ^ a q is a martingale as well. Moreover, from Theorem 5 of Ivanovs and Palmowski [2012] (see remark just af- ter this theorem as well) and by Lemma 2.4 of Kuznetsov and Rivero [2013] we know i ij q C1 that if FCp q and FCp q (i, j E) are absolutely continuous, then W p q 0, . P 1 P p 8q Which means from Theorem 4.2 that φw C 0, . Thus φw is sufficiently smooth to apply infinitesimal generator. P p 8q i Theorem 5.8. Assume that for each i, j E the distribution functions FCp q and ij i Pij FCp q have continuous densities fCp q and fCp q. Then the Gerber-Shiu function φw is in C1 0, and for x 0 it satisfies the following differential equation p 8q ě 8 i piφw,i1 x φw,i x y φw,i x fCp q y dy p q` 0 p p ´ q´ p qq p q ż 8 ik (25) qik φw,i x y φw,i x fCp q y dy qφw,i x 0 ` 0 p p ´ q´ p qq p q ´ p q“ kPE ż kÿ‰i with the boundary conditions

φw x w x for x 0, p q“ p q ă lim φw x 0. x Ñ`8 p q“ Proof. Since a 0 in (24) is general then (25) follows straightforward from (24) and Dynkin formulaą since it is equivalent to the requirement that

Aφw,i x qφw,i x 0, i E, p q´ p q“ P where A is the infinitesimal generator of X with the domain included in C1 0, . It suffices to prove now only the boundary conditions. The first one follows straightfor-p 8q ward from definition of the Gerber-Shiu function. The second one is a consequence of net-profit condition (3).  The equation given in Theorem 5.8 is well-known for classical risk process; see e.g. Kyprianou [2013] and references therein. In the context of Markov modulated risk process it appears e.g. in Asmussen [1989], Jacobsen [2005], Ng and Yang [2006], Badescu and Landriault [2009], Cheung and Landriault [2009].

6. Cramer´ asymptotics We will follow Asmussen and Albrecher [2010] and Asmussen [1989]. We recall that for α 0 the matrix F α has a real simple eigenvalue k α , which is larger than the realě part of any otherp q eigenvalue. The corresponding left-p q eigenvector v α and right-eigenvector h α can be chosen so that vi α 0 and p q p q p q ą hi α 0 for all i. The normalization requirement p qą πh α 1, v α h α 1 p q“ p q p q“ 10 Z. Palmowski results in the unique choice of v α and h α . Let π π1, π2,...,πN be a stationary distribution of J. Observep q that k p0 q 0, h 0 “1 pand v π. q We assume in this section that there existsp q“ solutionp γq“ 0 of so-called“ Cram´er- Lundberg equation ą (26) k γ 0. p´ q“ γx i Note that a necessary condition for this existence is that 8 e P Cp q dx 0 p P qă`8 and that 8 eγxP C ij dx , hence both C i and C ij must be light-tailed. 0 p q p q ş p q This solution γ isp calledP anqă`8 adjustment coefficient. We considerş now the exponential change of measure

dP˜ F t γ Xt x k γ t hJt γ γ Xt x hJt γ (27) P| e´ p ´ q´ p´ q p q e´ p ´ q p q . d Ft “ hJ0 γ “ hJ0 γ | p q p q From Palmowski and Rolski [2002] it follows that our risk process X,J under P˜ is again MAP with the matrix exponent p q ˜ 1 F α ∆h´ γ F α γ ∆h γ . p q“ p´ q p ´ q p´ q

Thus the largest eigenvalue under P˜ equals k˜ α k α γ and hence k˜1 0 p q “ p ´ q p q “ k1 γ . Moreover, from the martingale property of the density process used in the abovep´ q change of measure we can conclude that

αXt 1 k α t 1 Ei e e p q . hJ α “ hi α „ t p q  p q By twice differentiation, we derive

2 VarπX1 k 0 0 “ p qě (see e.g. Asmussen [2003, Cor. 2.6]) and the function β k β is convex. We have Ñ p q

(28) k1 0 EπX1. p q“ By net profit condition (3) we have k1 0 0 and therefore it his means that p q ą k˜1 0 k1 γ 0. From (28) we know that k˜1 0 equals the asymptotic drift of X p q“ p´ qă p q under P˜ which is negative, that is, limt Xt P˜-a.s. In other words, under new measure the ruin is certain: Ñ`8 “ ´8

(29) P˜ τ0´ 1. p ă8q“ This allows us to prove the main theorem of this section. Theorem 6.9. φi x lim p q Ci x e γx Ñ`8 ´ “ for some finite constant Ci 0. ą Proof. Denoting by E˜ the expectation with respect of P˜ note that by Optional Stopping Theorem we have

γX γX γx τ´ hi γ γx τ´ hi γ φi x e´ E˜x,i e 0 p q ; τ0´ e´ E˜x,i e 0 p q p q“ » hJ ´ γ ă8fi “ » hJ ´ γ fi τ0 p q τ0 p q – fl – fl Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 11 where the last equality follows from (29). Moreover, using dual process X X, we have “´ ˆ φi x γ X ` x hi γ p p q E˜0 e p τˆx ´ q p q , e γx ,i h γ ´ “ « Jˆ` ff τx p q ˆ whereτ ˆx` inf t 0 : Xt x . From the Renewal Theorem 28 of Dereich et al. [2017] (see“ alsotAthreyaě etą al. u[1978], Lalley [1984], Kesten [1974] and Alsmeyer [1994]) we can conclude that right hand side of above identity tends to constant.  Remark 6.4. In the context of general L´evy processes above Cram´er asymptotics was proved by Bertoin and Doney [1994].

7. Subexponential asymptotics We recall that by Theorem 4.6 the ruin probability φ x equals the tail of the maximum p q M sup Sk “ k 0 ě of a Markov modulatated random walk k (30) Sk ξk “ l 1 ÿ“ i with negative drift defined in (4.6) where the distribution F p q x of ξ is determined ξ p q by the random variable (19) and discrete time Markov chain with the transition matrix (20). This section deals with the study of the asymptotic distribution of the tail of the distribution of M when the increments ξk have heavy-tailed distributions, that is, when solution of Cram´er-Lundberg equation (26) does not exist. By a heavy-tailed distribution we mean a distribution (function) G on R possessing no sy exponential moments: 08 e G dy for all s 0. We will use the principle of a single big jump, which says thatp q“8 the maximumą of the random walk is essentially due to a single very largeş jump. More precisely, in this section we will model the claim size by a subexponential distribution. This family of distributions is used to model many catastrophic events like earthquakes, storms, terrorist attacks etc. Additionally, insurance companies use e.g. the lognormal distribution (which is subexponential) to model car claims. For any distribution function G on R, we set G x 1 G x and denote by n p q “ ´ p q G˚ the n-fold convolution of G by itself. A distribution G on R belongs to the class S of subexponential distributions if and only if, for all n 2,` we have ě n lim G˚ x G x n. x Ñ8 p q{ p q“ It is sufficient to verify this condition in the case n 2—see Chistyakov [1964]. “ This statement is easily shown to be equivalent to the condition that, if ξ1,...,ξn are i.i.d. random variables with common distribution G, then

P ξ1 ξn x P max ξ1,...,ξn x , p `¨¨¨` ą q„ p p qą q a statement which already exemplifies the principle of a single big jump. Here for any two functions f, g on R, by f x g x as x we mean limx f x g x 1; we also say that f and g are tail-equivalentp q„ p q . TheÑ8 class S includesÑ8 allp theq{ heavy-p q“ tailed distributions commonly found in applications, in particular regularly-varying, 12 Z. Palmowski lognormal and Weibull distributions. For any distribution G on R with finite mean, we define the integrated (or second) tail distribution (function) GI by

8 GI x 1 GI x min 1, G z dz . p q“ ´ p q“ p q ˆ żx ˙ Good surveys of the basic properties of heavy-tailed distributions, in particular long-tailed and subexponential distributions, may be found in Foss et al. [2013], Embrechts et al. [1997] and in Asmussen and Albrecher [2010]. In this section we assume that there exists some reference distribution F with finite mean and some constants ci i E) such that p P i (D1) F p q x F x , for all x R, i E, ξ p qď p q P P i I I (D2) F p q x ciF x as x , i E, ξ p q„ p q Ñ8 P (D3) F I S. P The condition (D1) is no less restrictive than the condition

i F p q x lim sup sup ξ p q , x i E F x ă8 Ñ8 P p q in which case it is straightforward to redefine F , and then c, so that (D1) and (D2) hold as above. Further, the condition D3 holds for example when integrated tail distribution of claim size at some statep i qE is subexponential, that is there exists i E such that P P i I F p q S. C P Define

(31) C ciπi. “ i E ÿP In Foss et al. [2007] the following rewult is proved. Theorem 7.10. Suppose that (D1)–(D3) hold. Then

φi x Pi M x C lim p q lim p ą q , x F I x “ x F I x “ a Ñ8 p q Ñ8 p q where a is given in (23) and i E. P Most of the papers concern simple random walk hence the case when N 1 and there are no Markov modulation. Then this problem has been very well understood.“ I In this context taking a Eξ1 0 and assuming that F S for distribution “ ´ ą P function F of ξ1 from Theorem we derive classical the Pakes-Veraverbeke’s Theo- rem: 1 (32) P M x F I x as x ; p ą q„ a p q Ñ8 see e.g. Pakes [1975], Embrechts and Veraverbeke [1982] The intuitive idea un- derlying this result is the following: the maximum M will exceed a large value x if the process follows the typical behaviour specified by the law of large numbers, i.e. it’s mean path, except that at some one time n a jump occurs of size greater than x na; this has probability F x na ; replacing the sum over all n of these probabilities` by an integral yields (p32);` thisq again is the principle of a single big Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 13 jump. See Zachary [2004] for a short proof of (32) based on this idea (see also Foss and Zachary [2002]).

8. Segerdahl’s approximation of finite-time ruin probability Our goal in this section is generalizing the seminal result of Segerdahl [1959] to Markov modulated risk process, that is, to get the asymptotics of the finite time ruin probability φ x, t introduced in (17) when time horizon t is of order x m yc?x m for p q { ` { 2 (33) m E˜πXˆ1 E˜πX1 0 and c VarπXˆ1 VarπX1. “ “´ ą “ “ Above Varπ denotes the variance calculated under P˜ where J0 starts at stationary Ą Ą distribution π. Let ΦN be a cumulant distribution function of standard gaussian randomĄ variable. Theorem 8.11. We have 3 2 φi x, x m yc?x m { lim p { ` { q CiΦN x , x e γx Ñ`8 ´ “ p q where constant Ci and the adjustment coefficient γ 0 are given in (26). ą Proof. Using the same arguments like in the proof of Theorem 6.9 we have ˆ γx γ Xˆ` x (34) φi x, t e´ E˜0,i e p τx ´ q;ˆτ ` t . p q“ x ă „  Using Markov modulated random walk Central Limit Theorem of Keilson and Wishart [1964] we have the following result. ˆ P˜ Xs ms Lemma 8.1. Under , c?´s converges weakly to standard gaussian random vari- able N 0, 1 as s . p q Ñ `8 ˆ ˆ` X ` mτx From Anscombe’s theorem it follows that τˆx ´ converges weakly to N 0, 1 ˆ` c?τx p q as well. Moreover, similarly by the Law of Large Numbers and Anscombe’s theorem we get x m P˜ a.s. as x . τˆx` Ñ ´ Ñ `8

Further, by Renewal Theorem 28 of Dereich et al. [2017] the overshoot Xˆˆ` x τx ´ converges weakly to some random variable and hence

τˆ` x m x ´ { c?x m3 2 { { converges weakly to N 0, 1 as well. The following Stam’s lemma states that ruin time and deficit are asymptoticallyp q independent. Lemma 8.2. For bounden and continuous functions f on 0, and g on R for x 0, we have that r 8q ą x τˆx` m (35) E˜i f ξ x g ´ E˜if ξ E˜g N 0, 1 , p p qq c?x m3 2 „ p p8qq p p qq ˆ ˆ { { ˙˙ where ξ x Xˆˆ` x. p q“ τx ´ 14 Z. Palmowski

1 Proof. Let x1 x x 4 , then we have: “ ´ 1 ˜ ˜ 4 Ei τˆ` τˆ`1 Ei τˆ` τˆ`1 ; ξ x1 x x ´ x “ x ´ x p qď ´ 1 ¯ 1 ` ˘ E˜ 4 E˜ 1 4 τˆx` x1 ; ξ x1 x τˆ 4 O x . ď ´ p qď ď x “ p q ´ ¯ ´ ¯ E Hence in (35) we can replaceτ ˆx` byτ ˆx`1 . Because ξ x ξ we have f ξ x 1 p q ùñ p8q p p qq Ñ Ef ξ and similarly using the fact that x 4 ξ x1 converges in probability to wep p8qq get: ´ p q 8 E˜ F i f ξ x τˆ` p p qq| x1 ” ı 1 1 E˜ 4 F E˜ 4 F i f ξ x ; ξ x1 x τˆ` i f ξ x ; ξ x1 x ;τ ˆx`1 ̺ τˆ` “ p p qq p qą | x1 ` p p qq p qď ď | x1 ” 1 ı ” ı E˜ 4 F i f ξ x ; ξ x1 x ;τ ˆx`1 ̺ τˆ` ` p p qq p qď ą | x1 ” ı converges in probability to E˜if ξ which is the consequence of the fact that 1 p p8qq E˜ 4 F E˜ i f ξ x ; ξ x1 x ;τ ˆx`1 ̺ τˆ` converges to if ξ in probability as p p qq p qď ą | x1 p p8qq first” x and then ̺ . Finallyı we get: Ñ `8 Ñ `8 x τˆx` m E˜i f ξ x g ´ p p qq c?x m3 2 ˆ ˆ { { ˙˙ x x τˆx`1 m τˆx`1 m E˜i f ξ x g ´ E˜i E˜i f ξ x Fˆ` g ´ 3 2 τ 1 3 2 „ ˜ p p qq ˜c?x1 m { ¸¸ “ ˜ p p qq | x ˜c?x1 m { ¸¸ { ´ ¯ { x1 τˆx`1 m E˜i f ξ x Fˆ` E˜i g ´ E˜if ξ E˜g N 0, 1 . τ 1 3 2 “ p p qq | x ˜ ˜c?x1 m { ¸¸ „ p p8qq p p qq ´ ¯ { 

Now, from (34) we get ˆ 3 2 γx γ Xˆ` x 3 2 φi x, x m yc?x m { e´ E˜0,i e p τx ´ q;ˆτ ` x m yc?x m { p { ` { q“ x ă { ` { „  τˆ x γxE˜ γξ P˜ x` m γx e´ i e p8q ´ 3 2 y Cie´ ΦN x „ c?x m { ď „ p q ” ı ˆ { ˙ which completes the proof of Theorem 8.11. 

9. Hoglund’s¨ asymptotics of Markov modulated renewal function and finite-time ruin probability Recall that E 1, 2,...,N . In this section we will consider the solution “t u 8 n d (36) U f x Υ˚ f x , x R , d N ˚ p q“ n 0 ˚ p q P P ÿ“ of the renewal equation U Υ U f where Υ Υij i,j E is matrix of a positive measures and f is a vector´ of˚ measurable“ functions“ p forqt whichP u series (36) converges. Moreover, denotes convolution in the Markov modulation set-up, that is, ˚ k Υ˚ f x i fi x y1 y2 ... yk Υii1 dy1 Υi1i2 dy2 ... Υi 1i dyk . p p qq “ k p ´ ´ ´ ´ q p q p q k´ k p q i1,i2,...,ik 1,ik E ÿ´ P ż Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 15

We assume that support of each measure Υij is d-dimensional. Let λRd denotes the Haar measure in Rd and by , we denote the scalar product in Rd. We denote ă ¨ ¨ą d 2 θ,x Θ θ R : x eă ąΥij dx , i,j E , “t P | | p qă8 P u ż Υ dx πiΥij dx , p q“ i,j E p q ÿP θ,x ϕ θ eă ąΥ dx , θ Θ, p q“ p q P ż θ,x ϕ1 θ xeă ąΥ dx , θ Θ, p q“ p q P ż T θ,x ϕ2 θ xx eă ąΥ dx , θ Θ, p q“ p q P ż d 1 β max 2, ´ , “ 2 " 1* C ϕ1 θ ϕ2 θ ´ ϕ1 θ detϕ2 θ , “ p qp p 1qq p q p q 1 ̟ x ϕ2 θ ´ ϕ1 θ ϕ1 θ ϕ2 θ ´ ϕ1 θ . “ p p qq p q{ p qp p qq p q We will look for the solution of the equation (37) ϕ θ 1. p q“ If this solution exists, we have either ϕ1 θ 0 or it is one-point set otherwise (com- pare with Hoglund [1988, Lem. 1]). Wep q‰ recall that function g is directly Riemann integrable if gh g tends to 0 as h 0 for gh x supy nh, n 1 h g x and ´ h | | Ñ p q“ Pp p ` q s p q g x infy nh, n 1 h g x for x nh, n 1 h . hp q“ Ppş p `ş q s p q P p p ` q s Theorem 9.12. Assume that ϕ1 θ 0 and θ satisfies (37). Let ̟ 0. Suppose 2 β θ,x p q‰ β θ,x ě that x c, x eă ąΥij dx and 1 c, x eă ą f x λRd dx are finitep| | for`|ă all i, j ąE | qand that integrandp q inp the`|ă last integralą | q is directly| p q| Riemannp q integrableş for some P0 c Rd. In addition,ş we assume that c, ϕ θ 0 if d 2. Then ‰ P ă p q ą‰ “ θ,x d 1 2 1 2 1 eă ą U f x 1 i 2π̟ ´p ´ q{ C´ { exp x ̟ϕ1 θ ϕ2 θ ´ x ̟ϕ1 θ p ˚ p q q “ p q t´p ´ p qqp p qq p ´ p qqu θ,y d 1 2 eă ąπf x λRd dy o 1 c, x ´p ´ q{ ˆ p q p q` pp `|ă ą |q q ż uniformly in x, as x . In particular, if ϕ1 θ ϕ1 θ x x we have | |Ñ`8 p q{| p q| “ {| | U f x 1 i d 1 2 1 2 θ,y (38) lim p ˚ p q q 2π̟ ´p ´ q{ C´ { eă ąπf x λRd dy . x e θ,x “ p q p q p q | |Ñ`8 ´ă ą ż Proof. Basically the proof is the same as the proof of Hoglund [1988, Thm. 1.2 and Thm. 1.4]. There are some minor differences though. In any estimate one has to take all algebraic operations entrywise for matrices and then maximum of minimum should be applied over E should be applied. The crucial difference is in the proof of equations (2.43) where Central limit Theorem is applied to a random walk associated with measure Υ. In this place one has to use Keilson and Wishart [1964] instead (see for page 552 there).  To identify the finite time ruin probability at the beginning we follow Hoglund [1990, Prop. 3.2]. 16 Z. Palmowski

1 2 1 2 Let S ,S Sn,Sn ,n 1, 2,... be a (possibly killed) Markov modulated randomp walk startingq “tp fromq 0,“0 whoseu components S1 and S2 have non-negative increments, and consider thep crossingq probabilities P 1 2 Ga,b,i x,y,i i N x ,SN x x a,SN x x b , p q “ p p qă8 p q ą ` p q ď ` q P 1 2 Ka,b,i x,y,i i N x ,SN x x a,SN x x b , p q “ p p qă8 p q ą ` p q ě ` q where a 0,b R and ě P (39) N x min n : S1 x . p q“ t n ą u Recall that π is the stationary distribution of environmental Markov chain J and let F denote the (possibly defective) distribution function of the increments of the random walk with joint Laplace transform φ and set ux vy F u,v dx, dy e´ ´ F dx, dy φ u, v . p qp q“ p q{ p q Let Eζ 2Eζ 1 1Eζ 2 2 Eζ 1 3 V ζ π S1 π S1 S1 π S1 π S1 p ζq“ rp r s´ r sq s{ r s for ζ ξ, η where E denotes the expectation w.r.t. Fζ . For our purposes it will suffice“ to p considerq random walks that satisfy the following non-lattice assumption (the analogue of the non-lattice assumption in one dimension): (G) The additive group spanned by the support of F contains R2 . ` n Now observe that Ga,b,i x, y and Ka,b,i x, y are of the form n8 0 Υ˚ f x 1 i with d 2, p q p q p “ ˚ p q q “ 1 2 ř Υ dx, dy P˜ S1 dx, S1 dy p q“ p P P q and fi x, y Υ x a, , , x b 1 or f x, y Υ x a, , x b, p1, respectively.q “ pp ` One`8q canp´8 easily check` sq that allp momentsq “ andpp direct` `8q Riemrann` integrability`8qq conditions of Theorem 9.12 are satisfied. Applying (38) produces the following key proposition. Proposition 9.1. Assume that G holds, and that there exists a ζ ξ, η with Eζ 1 Epζ q 2 “ p q φ ζ 1 such that v π S1 π S1 , where φ is finite in a neighbourhood of ζ p q “ “ r s{ r s 1 2 and 0, η . If x, y tend to infinity such that x vx o y { 0 then it holds that p q “ ` p qą 1 2 xξ yη Ga,b,i x, y D a,b x´ { e ` if η 0, p q „ p q ą 1 2 xξ yη Ka,b,i x, y D a,b x´ { e ` if η 0, p q „ p q ă 1 2 for a 0,b R, where D a,b C a,b 2πV ζ ´ { , with V ζ 0 and ě P p q“ p q ¨ p p qq p qą 1 bη 8 Pζ 1 ξx C a,b ζ 1 e π S1 x e dx. p q“ η Eπ S1 a p ě q | | r s ż In the last step we follow Palmowski and Pistorius [2009] and prove the following main result satisfied for general MAP Xˆt Xt. The result below concerns the asymptotics of the finite time ruin probability“ ´

φi x P τˆ` t p q“ p x ď q when x, t jointly tend to infinity in fixed proportion. For a given proportion v the rate of decay is either equal to γvt or to ψ˚ v t, where ψ˚ is the convex conjugate p q of the Perron-Frobenius eigenvalue kˆ of the matrix exponent Fˆ of MAP Xˆ:

kˆ˚ x sup αx kˆ α . p q“ α Rp ´ p qq P Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 17

We restrict ourselves to the risk process in the regime switching environment sat- isfying the following condition ij (H) νp q defined in (14) are non-lattice for all i, j E. P Recall that a measure is called non-lattice if its support is not contained in a set of the form a bh,h Z , for some a,b 0. To presentt ` the mainP u result we needą few additional assumptions. Let Lt be a local time of Xt infs t Xs which in our case increases only at ´ ď 1 epochs τk defined via τ0 : 0, τk : inf t τk 1 : Xt infs t Xs 0 . Let Lt´ be “ “ tLą1 ´ ´ ď “ u the inverse local time and as usual let ´t denote the vector of total times spent 1 1 L 1 in different phases up to Lt´ . Observe that the ladder process Ht, t´ ,JL´ pp q t q 1 for Ht XL´ is a bivariate Markov additive process. Thus there exists matrix “ t valued function K α, b such that p q 1 αH b,L´ K α,b t E e t´x t y; J ´1 e p q , r Lt s“ 1 because L0´ 0; here α 0 and βi 0. Note that“ the bivariateě MAP ě 1 ´ 1 Hˆ t, Lˆ , J t H , L´ ,J pp t q q “ pp t t q tq with J t J ˆ´1 “ Lt is a ladder process related with supremum of the dual risk process Xˆ X and “ ´ Kˆ α, b is its matrix Laplace exponent. We denote by π the stationary distribution p q ˆ of J t. The assumption (H) implies that the jump measures associated to H is non- lattice as well. To simplify notation we will write in this section 1 1 H , L´ 1 Ht,L´ . p t t q “ p t q We will also write f g if limx,t ,x vt o t1{2 f x, t g x, t 1. Let „ Ñ8 “ ` p q p q{ p q“ Θ θ R : kˆ θ . “t P p qă8u Theorem 9.13. Assume that H holds. Suppose that 0 kˆ1 γ k γ p q ă p q “ p´ qă8 and that there exists a Γ v Θ˝ such that kˆ1 Γ v v. If x and t tend to infinity 1 2p qP p p qq “ such that x vt o t { then “ ` p q γx ˆ P Cie´ , if 0 v k1 γ , φi x i τˆx` t 1 2 kˆ˚ v t ă ă p q p q“ p ď q„ Dvt´ { e´ p q , if v kˆ1 γ , # ą p q with Ci given in Theorem 6.9 and ´1 E ηvL1 1 v log π e´ 1 L´ 1 1 ´ r t 1 ă8us Dv ´1 , Γ v H1 ηv L “ ηvEπ e 1 H11 ´1 1 ˆ p q ´ L1 Γ v 2πkˆ Γ v r t ă8us p q 2p p qq b where ηv kˆ Γ v . “ p p qq Remark 9.5. In the case of risk process (1) with N 1 (there is no Marov modulation) we can find that “

Γ v Γ˜ v 1 kˆ1 0 Dv p q` p q , C p q , “ ˜ “ ˆ Γ v Γ v 2πkˆ Γ v k1 γ p q p q 2p p qq p q b 18 Z. Palmowski where Γ˜ v sup θ : kˆ θ kˆ Γ v , recovering formulas that can be found in Arfwedsonp q “ [1955t ] andp´Fellerq “ [1966p p ]qqu respectively, for the case of a classical risk process.

Remark 9.6. Note that asymptotics given in Theorem 9.13 works for different range of time horizons than Segerdahl’s approximation identified in Theorem 8.11.

Proof. In the case 0 v kˆ1 γ , the asymptotics in Theorem 9.13 are a con- sequence of the law ofă largeă numbers.p q To see why this is the case, note that γx γx γx e Pi τˆ` t e Pi τˆ` e Pi t τˆ` , where the first term tends p x ď q“ p x ă 8q´ p ă x ă 8q to Ci in view of Theorem 6.9, while for the second term the Markov property imply that

γxP e i t τˆx` p ă x ă 8q P ˆ γy γ x y P i τˆx` t, Xt dy e e p ´ q j τˆx` y ´ ď j E p ą P q p ă 8q P ż´8 ÿx γy Pi Xˆt dy e P˜i Xˆt x , ď p P q “ p ď q ż´8 which tends to 0 as t tends to infinity in view of the law of large numbers since 1 2 E˜ Xˆt tkˆ1 γ x vt o t { . We will now consider the case of v kˆ1 γ . r Wes“ startp fromqą construction“ ` p ofq the embedded Markov modulated randomą p walkq at Poisson epochs. Denote by e1,e2,... a sequence of independent exp q distributed n p q random variables and by σn i 1 ei, with σ0 0, the corresponding partial sums, and consider the two-dimensional“ “ (killed) Markov“ modulated random walk S1,S2 ,n 1, 2 ... starting fromř 0, 0 with step-sizes distributed according to tp n nq “ u p q q P 1 F p q dt, dx Hσ1 dx, L´ dt , p q“ p P σ1 P q q and write Gp q for the corresponding crossing probability

q P 2 Gp q x, y G0,0,i x, y i N x ,SN x y p q“ p q“ p p qă8 p q ď q q for N x defined in (39). Note that F p q is a probability measure that is defective p q precisely if Xˆ drifts to , with Laplace transform φ given by ´8

ut vx q 1 (40) φ u, v e´ ´ F p q dt, dx q q κ u, v ´ , p q“ p q“ p ´ p qq ij where κ u, v Kˆ u, v1T . p q“ p q P The key step in the proof is to derive bounds for τˆx` t in terms of crossing probabilities involving the random walk S1,S2 : p ď q p q Lemma 9.3. Let M, q 0. For x, t 0 it holds that ą ą q P q (41) Gp q x, t i τˆx` t Gp q x, t M min hi 0 ,M , i E p qď p ď qď p ` q{ P p ´ q P 1 where h 0 ,M limx 0 h x, M , with h x, t Hσ1 x, Lσ´1 t 1. p ´ q“ Ò p q p q“ p ą ď q Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 19

1 Proof. Let T x inf t 0 : Ht x and note thatτ ˆ` L´ . By applying the p q“ t ě ą u x “ T x Markov property it follows that p q P P 1 (42) i τˆx` t i T x ,LT´ x t p ď q “ p p qă8 p q ď q 8 1 P σn 1 T x σn,L´ t ´ T x “ n 1 p ď p qă p q ď q ÿ“ 8 P 1 Hσn´1 x, Hσn x, LT´ x t “ n 1 p ď ą p q ď q ÿ“ 8 P H y,L 1 s (43) i σn´1 d σ´n´1 d “ n 1 p P P q “ ż ÿ P 1 Hσ1 x y,LT´ x y t s ˆ p ą ´ p ´ q ď ´ q 8 q n (44) F p q‹ f x, t U f x, t i, “ ˜n 0 ‹ p q¸ “ pp ‹ qp qq ÿ“ i q n P 1 where U 8 0 F p q‹ , f x, t Hσ1 x, L´ t 1 and denotes convolu- “ n p q“ p ą T x ď q ‹ tion. Following“ a similar reasoning it can be checkedp q that ř q (45) Gp q x, t U h x, t 1 i. p q “ p ‹ p q q In view of (44) and (45), the lower bound in (41) follows since f x, t h x, t , p qě p q taking note of the fact that Hσ1 x precisely if T x σ1, while the upper bound in (41) follows by observing thatą for fixed M 0,p qă ą P 1 1 1 h x, t M Hσ1 x, LT´ x t,Lσ´1 LT´ x M 1 p ` q ě p ą p q ď ´ p q ď q P 1 P 1 Hσ1 x, LT´ x t Lσ´1 M 1 “ p ą p q ď q p ď q f x, t min hi 0 ,M , i E ě p q P p ´ q 1 where we used the strong Markov property of L´ and the lack of memory property of σ1. 

Applying H¨oglund’s asymptotics in Proposition 9.1 yields the following result. Lemma 9.4. Let the assumptions of Proposition 9.1 hold true. If x, t such 1 2 Ñ 8 that for v kˆ1 γ we have x vt o t { then ą p q “ ` p q q 1 2 kˆ˚ v t Gp q x, t M Dq,M t´ { e´ p q ,M 0, p ` q„ ě v where Dq,M Cq,M with ?2πkˆ2 Γ v “ p p qq π ˆ kˆ Γ v M q κ k Γ v , 0 1 Cq,M e p p qq p p p qq q q κ kˆ Γ v , 0 ´ 1, “ cvkˆ Γ v Γ v p ` p p p qq qq p p qq p q ˆ ´1 Γ 1 Γ E v H k v L1 1 where cv π e p q ´ p p qq H11 L´ 1. “ r t 1 ă8us o u For u γ and u Θ we denote by Pp q the measure ą P P u d pFq t α Xt x k α t hJt α (46) P| e p ´ q´ p q p q . d Ft “ hJ0 α | p q 20 Z. Palmowski

u u Let Ep q be the expectation with respect of Pp q. Lemma 9.4 is a consequence of the following auxiliary identities given in Palmowski and Pistorius [2009]:

(47) φ z, u 1 iff κ z, u 0 iff kˆ u z, p ´ q “ p ´ q“ p q“ ˆ E u ˆ E u E u 1 1 (48) k1 u πp q X1 πp q Hσ1 πp q L´ ´ , p q “ r s“ r s ¨ p r σ1 sq ˆ E u ˆ 1 2 E u 1 1 k2 u pπ q Hσ1 k1 u L´ πp q L´ ´ , p q “ rp ´ p q σ1 q s ¨ p r σ1 sq ˆ E u ˆ 1 2 E u 1 (49) k1 u pπ q Hσ1 k1 u L´ πp q Hσ1 ´ , “ p q rp ´ p q σ1 q s ¨ p r sq o (50) kˆ˚ v vΓ v kˆ Γ v for v 0 with Γ v Θ . p q “ p q´ p p qq ą p qP q Proof of Lemma 9.4. The proof follows by an application of Prop. 9.1 to Gp q x, t M with p ` q 1 2 1 S1 ,S1 Hσ1 ,L´ and ζ Γ v , ηv . p q “ p σ1 q “ p´ p q q

Note that, by (47) with u Γ v , φ ζ 1, and that ηv kˆ Γ v 0 if v kˆ1 γ . “ p q Ep ζq“1 E Γ v “ p p qq ą ą p q For this choice of the parameters, π S1 pπ p qq Hσ1 1 cv q, and Equations r s “ r s “ { (48),(49) (50) imply that ξx ηt kˆ˚ v t and ` “´ p q

V ζ kˆ2 Γ v kˆ1 Γ v kˆ2 Γ v v. p q“ p p qq{ p p qq “ p p qq{ To complete the proof we are left to verify the form of the constants. The calculation ηM of the Cq,M C 0, 0 e goes as follows: “ p q ˆ Γ k v M ˆ 1 qe p p qq 8 Γ v x Γ v H k Γ v L´ Eπ σ1 σ1 Cq,M e´ p q e p q ´ p p qq 1 x Hσ1 1dx “ kˆ Γ v cv 0 r tp ď ă8qus p p qq ˆż ˙ kˆ Γ v M qe ˆ Γ ´1 p p qq k v Lσ 1 Eπ e´ p p qq 1 1 ´1 1 Lσ1 “ kˆ Γ v Γ v cv ´ r tp ă8qus p p qq p q ´ ¯ kˆ Γ v M qe p p qq 1 1 qπ q κ kˆ Γ v , 0 ´ 1 “ kˆ Γ v Γ v cv ´ p ` p p p qq qq p p qq p q ´ ¯ kˆ Γ v M qe p p qq 1 πκ kˆ Γ v , 0 q κ kˆ Γ v , 0 ´ 1, “ kˆ Γ v Γ v cv p p p qq qp ` p p p qq qq p p qq p q in view of the definition of κ. Combining all results completes the proof. 

1 2 kˆ˚ v tP Now we can complete the proof of Theorem 9.13. Writing l t, x t { e p q τˆx` t , Lemmas 9.3 and 9.4 imply that p q“ p ď q

s lim sup l t, x Dq,M min hi 0 ,M , “ x,t ı,x tv o t1{2 p qď { i E p ´ q Ñ “ ` p q P i lim inf l t, x Dq,0. “ x,t ı,x tv o t1{2 p qě Ñ “ ` p q

By definition of h and Dq,M it directly follows that, as q , Ñ8 kˆ Γ v M 1 Dq,0 Dv,Dq,M Dve p p qq and h 0 ,M P L´ M 1 1. Ñ Ñ p ´ q“ p σ1 ď q Ñ

Letting M 0 yields that s i Dv, and the proof is complete.  Ó “ “ Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 21

10. Parisian ruin In this section we follow Czarna and Palmowski [2011], Loeffen et al. [2013], Dassios and Wu [2008] considering so-called Parisian ruin probability, that occurs if the risk process X defined in (1) stays below zero for a longer period than a fixed ζ 0. Formally, we define Parisian time of ruin by: ą ζ τ inf t 0 : t sup s t : Xs 0 ζ,Xt 0 “ t ą ´ t ă ě uě ă u and Parisian ruin probability is then given by: ζ Px,i τ . p ă 8q The case ζ 0 corresponds to classical ruin problem and we do not deal with this case in this“ section. The name for this problem is borrowed from the Parisian option. Depending on type of such option the prices are activated or canceled if underlying asset stays above or below barrier long enough in a row. It is a common belief that Parisian ruin probability is a better measure of risk that classical ruin probability in many situations giving possibility for insurance company to get solvency. We consider here the fixed delay ζ. In other papers the deterministic and fixed delay ζ is replaced by an independent exponential random variable; see e.g. Landriault et al. [2014], Baurdoux et al. [2016]. In this case, as pointed in Ivanovs [2017], Bin et al. [2018], the ruin probability is closely related with Poisson observed ruin probability. The paper that deal with this probability in the context of MAP risk processes is Zhao and Dong [2018]. We give in next theorem different main representation of the Parisian survival probability though. Recall that by

τ ` inf t 0 : Xt x x “ t ě ą u we denote the first passage time over a level x 0 and observe that X ` x a.s., ě τx “ because of absence of positive jumps. The Markov additive property applied at τx` implies that J ` , the phase observed at the first passage times, is a Markov chain τx indexed by the level x 0. Hence there is an identity: ě qτ ` Gpqqx (51) E e´ x ,J ` e , x 0 r τx s“ ě q for some transition rate matrix Gp q which is of size N N. Moreover, by Ivanovs and Palmowski q ˆ [2012] the matrix Gp q is a right solution of q F Gp q qI. p´ q“ Theorem 10.14. Parisian survival probability for a MAP risk process equals: ζ (52) Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ p “ `8q “ p “ `8q 8 P P P ζ x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` ζ τ , ` 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q p “ `8q ż P 1 P ζ where x,i τ0´ φi x W x W ´ 1 i by (18), and the vector τ p ζ “ `8q “ p q “ p p q p8q q p “ Pi τ i E solves the following system of equations `8q “ p p “ `8qqt P u ζ (53) Pi τ Px,i τ0´ p “ `8q “ p “ `8q 8 P P P ζ i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz,Jτ ´ k k τz` ζ,Jτ ` j j τ . 0 0 0 z ` j,k E p ă8 ´ P “ q p ď “ q p “ `8q ÿP ż 22 Z. Palmowski

Moreover, 8 θs 8 P P (54) e´ ds x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` s 0 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q ż ż 1 8 8 0 Gpθqy (55) up q z ν z dy dze , “ θ 0 0 p q p ` q ż ż where 0 Rz up q z W x e W x z . p q“ p q ´ p ´ q Proof. On the event τ ζ we decompose possible trajectory that goes below zero into two parts. Thet first“ 8u one starts at the undershoot of 0 of size, say, z 0 visiting zero in continuous way because of the spectral negativity of X in a´ shorteră period than ζ. The second part starts at 0 after this excursion below 0. Using the strong Markov property it will produce: ζ Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ p “8q“ p “ 8q 8 P P P ζ x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` ζ τ . ` 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q p “ 8q ż This justifies the equation (58). System of equations (53) follows straightforward from (58) by taking x 0 there. Finally, note that by (51), “ 8 1 ` 1 pθq θsP E θτz G z (56) e´ τz` s ds x,i e´ , τz` e . 0 p ď q “ θ ă8 “ θ ż ´ ¯ Further, from the compensation formula (4.1) and (4.2) we have

8 θs 8 P P e´ ds x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` s 0 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q ż ż 1 8 P Gpθqy x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dy e “ θ 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q ż 1 8 8 0 Gpθqy (57) up q z ν z dy dze “ θ 0 0 p q p ` q ż ż which completes the proof.  We will derive now the Cram´er’s estimate of the Parisian ruin probability. Theorem 10.15. Under Cram´er condition (26), ζ Px,i τ lim p ă `8q Cζ x e γx Ñ`8 ´ “ for some finite constant Cζ 0. ą Proof. We follow the same idea like in the proof of Theorem 6.9. That is, from (58) ζ (58) Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ p ă `8q “ p ă `8q 8 P P P ζ x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` ζ τ ´ 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q p “ `8q ż ˆ γx γ Xˆ` x hi γ (59) e´ E˜0,i e p τx ´ q p q “ h γ « Jˆ` ff τx p q ˆ γx 8 γ X ` x hi γ ζ E˜ p τˆx ´ q ˆ P P e´ 0,i e p q , Xτˆ` x dz τz` ζ τ . ´ 0 h γ p x ´ qP p ď q p “ `8q « Jˆ` ff ż τx p q Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 23

Using Renewal Theorem 28 of Dereich et al. [2017] and Tonelli theorem complete the proof.  We will move now to MAP risk process considered in Section 7 in which X is a Markov modulated drift minus compound Poisson process and claim size are subexponential. Theorem 10.16. Under assumptions of Theorem 7.10 we have ζ Py,i τ C lim p ă `8q x F I x “ a Ñ8 p q for C and a given in (31) and (23), respectively. Proof. Note that from definition of Parisian ruin time if follows that ζ Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ . p ă `8q ď p ă `8q Moreover, conditioned that risk process X got ruined, the deficit cannot be larger that p maxi E piζ, otherwise it will not manage to return to zero. Thus by Theorem“ 10.14 P ζ Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ p “p `8q “ p “ `8q P P P ζ x,i τ0´ , Xτ ´ dz τz` ζ τ ` 0 p ă8 ´ 0 P q p ď q p “ `8q ż and hence ζ Px,i τ Px,i τ0´ p ă `8q ě p ă `8q Px,i τ0´ , X ´ p . ´ p ă8 ´ τ0 ď q Further,

Px,i τ0´ , X ´ p Px,i τ0´ Px,i τ0´ , X ´ p p ă8 ´ τ0 ď q“ p ă 8q´ p ă8 ´ τ0 ą q Pi M x Px M x, ξ S x p , “ p ą q´ p ą τx ą ` q S where τx inf k 0 : Sk x for Sk defined in (30). Now using principle of one big jump“ (seet inequalitiesą ą (111)-(113)u of Foss et al. [2007]) and fact that any subexponential distribution is long-tailed one get that

C I Px M x, ξτ S x p 1 o 1 F x . p ą x ą ` q ě p ` p qq a p q Thus I Px,i τ0´ , X ´ p o F x p ă8 ´ τ0 ď q“ p p qq and this gives the assertion of the theorem. 

References A.E. Kyprianou A. Kuznetsov and V. Rivero. The theory of scale functions for spectrally negative L´evy processes. L´evy Matters II, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 97–186, 2013. G. Alsmeyer. On the Markov renewal theorem. Stochastic Process. Appl., 50(1), 37–56, 1994. G. Arfwedson. Research in collective risk theory. Skand. Aktuarietidskr., 38, 53–100, 1955. 24 Z. Palmowski

S. Asmussen. Risk theory in a Markovian environment. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 2, 69–100, 1989. S. Asmussen. Applied probability and queues., Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 2003. S. Asmussen and H. Albrecher. Ruin probabilities. Advanced Series on Statistical Science & Applied Probability, World Scientific Publishing, second edition, 2010. K.B. Athreya, D. McDonald, and P. Ney. Limit theorems for semi-Markov processes and renewal theory for Markov chains. Ann. Probab., 6(5), 788–797, 1978. A.L. Badescu and D. Landriault. Applications of fluid flow matrix analytic methods in ruin theory — a review. RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cien. Serie A. Mat., 103(2), 353–372, 2009. E.J. Baurdoux, J.C. Pardo, J.L. P´erez, and J.-F. Renaud. Gerber–shiu distribution at Parisian ruin for L´evy insurance risk processes. J. Appl. Probab., 53(2), 572– 584, 2016. J. Bertoin and R. Doney. Cram´er’s estimate for L´evy processes. Stat. Prob. Lett., 21, 363–365, 1994. L. Bin, G.E. Willmot, and J.T.Y. Wong. A temporal approach to the Parisian risk model. J. Appl. Probab., 55, 302–317, 2018. E. C¸inlar. Markov additive processes. I. Z. Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie verw. Geb., 24, 85–93, 1972. E. Cheung and D. Landriault. Perturbed map risk models with dividend barrier strategies. J. Appl. Probab., 46, 521–541, 2009. V.P. Chistyakov. A theorem on sums of independent positive random variables and its applications to branching random processes. Theory Probab. Appl., 9, 640–648, 1964. I. Czarna and Z. Palmowski. Ruin probability with parisian delay for a spectrally negative L´evy risk process. J. Appl. Probab., 48(4), 984–1002, 2011. A. Dassios and S. Wu. Parisian ruin with exponential claims. Unpublished manu- script, Available at http://stats.lse.ac.uk/angelos/, 2008. S. Dereich, L. D¨oring, and A. Kyprianou. Real self-similar processes started from the origin. Ann. Probab., 45(3), 1952–2003, 2017. P. Embrechts and N. Veraverbeke. Estimates for the probability of ruin with special emphasis on the possibility of large claims. Insurance Math. Econom., 1, 55–72, 1982. P. Embrechts, C. Kl¨uppelberg, and T. Mikosch. Modelling Extremal Events. Springer-Verlag, 1997. W. Feller. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, volume II. John Wiley & Sons, 1966. S. Foss and S. Zachary. Asymptotics for the maximum of a modulated random walk with heavy-tailed increments. In: Analytic Methods in Applied Probability (in memory of Fridrih Karpelevich), 207, 37–52, 2002. S. Foss, T. Konstantopoulos, and S. Zachary. Discrete and continuous time modu- lated random walks with heavy-tailed increments. J. Theor. Probab., 20, 581–612, 2007. S. Foss, D. Korshunov, and S. Zachary. An Introduction to Heavy-Tailed and Subex- ponential Distributions. Springer-Verlag, 2013. T. Hoglund. A mutidimensional renewal theorem. Bull. Sc. math., 2e seria, 112, 111–138, 1988. Ruin Probabilities and Regime Switching 25

T. Hoglund. An asymptotic expression for the probability of ruin within finite time. Ann. Probab., 18(1), 378–389, 1990. H. Albrecher and J. Ivanovs. Strikingly simple identities relating exit problems for L´evy processes under continuous and poisson observations. Stoch. Process. Appl., 127, 643–656, 2017. J. Ivanovs. Potential measures of one-sided Markov additive processes with reflect- ing and terminating barriers. J. Appl. Probab., 51(4), 1154–1170, 2014. J. Ivanovs and Z. Palmowski. Occupation densities in solving exit problems for Markov additive processes and their reflections. Stochastic Process. Appl., 122(9), 3342–3360, 2012. M. Jacobsen. The time to ruin for a class of markov additive risk process with two-sided jumps. Adv. Appl. Probab., 37(4), 963–992, 2005. J. Jacod and A. Shiryaev. Limit theorems for stochastic processes. Springer-Verlag, 2003. J. Keilson and D.M.G Wishart. A central limit theorem for processes defined on a finite markov chain. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 60, 547–567, 1964. H. Kesten. Renewal theory for functionals of a Markov chain with general state space. Ann. Probab., 2(3), 355–386, 1974. A. Kyprianou. Gerber–Shiu Risk Theory. Springer, 2013. A. Kyprianou and Z. Palmowski. A martingale review of some fluctuation theory for spectrally negative L´evy processes. In S´eminaire de Probabilit´eXXXVIII, 16–29. Springer, 2005. A. Kyprianou. Introductory Lectures on Fluctuations of L´evy Processes with Ap- plications. Springer-Verlag, 2006. S.P. Lalley. Conditional Markov renewal theory I. Finite and denumerable state space. Ann. Probab., 12(4), 1113–1148, 1984. D. Landriault, J.-F. Renaud, and X. Zhou. Insurance risk models with Parisian implementation delays. Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 16, 583–607, 2014. R. Loeffen, I. Czarna, and Z. Palmowski. Parisian ruin probability for spectrally negative L´evy processes. Bernoulli, 19(2), 599–609, 2013. A.C.Y. Ng and H. Yang. On the joint distribution of surplus before and after ruin under a markovian regime switching model. Stoch. Process. Appl., 116:244–266, 2006. A. Pakes. On the tails of waiting time distributions. J. Appl. Prob., 7, 745–789, 1975. Z. Palmowski and M. Pistorius. Cram´er asymptotics for finite time first passage probabilities of general L´evy processes. Stat. Prob. Lett., 79(16), 1752–1758, 2009. Z. Palmowski and T. Rolski. A technique for the exponential change of measure for Markov processes. Bernoulli, 8(6), 767–785, 2002. T. Rolski, H. Schmidli, V. Schmidt, and J. Teugels. Stochastic Processes for Insur- ance and Finance. Wiley, 1999. Z.B. Salah and M. Morales. L´evy systems and the time value of ruin for Markov additive processes. European Actuarial Journal, 2:289–317, 2012. C.-O. Segerdahl. A survey of results in the collective theory of risk. n Probability and statistics: The Harald Cram´er volume, 276–299, 1959. S. Zachary. A note on Veraverbeke’s theorem. Queueing Systems, 46, 9–14, 2004. 26 Z. Palmowski

X. Zhao and H. Dong. Parisian ruin probability for Markov additive risk processes. Advances in Difference Equations, 2018, 179, 2018.

Faculty of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Wroclaw University of Science and Tech- nology, Wyb. Wyspianskiego´ 27, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland Email address: [email protected]