This process can be described using a classical result from ruin theory - Cramér–Lundberg model. Let $X_t^x$ be the firm's capital at the time $t$ (in days) provided that initial capital was equal to $x$, and according to this model
$$X_t^x = x + c t - \sum_{k=1}^{N(t)} \xi_k,$$
where $c$ is the payments rate ($11000$ in your case), $N(t)$ is the Poisson process with intensity $\lambda$ ($10$ in your case) for claims, and $\xi_k$ are claims themselves, being independent exponentially distributed random variables.
Your question is essentially about the finite-horizon survival probability, which is defined as $\varphi(x,t) = 1 - \mathbb{P}\left(\inf_{0\leq s \leq t} X_s^x < 0\right)$. There is a classic results in ruin theory about an integro-differential equation for $\varphi(x, t)$:
$$
\begin{cases}
\frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial t} - c \frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial x} + \lambda \varphi(x, t) =
\lambda \int_0^x \varphi(x-y, t) \mathrm{d} F(y), \\
\varphi(x, 0) = 1, \;\lim_{x\to+\infty} \varphi(x, t) = 1,
\end{cases}
$$
where $\lambda$ is the rate of Poisson process and $F(y)$ is the CDF of $\xi_k$ (see, e.g. Ruin Probabilities: Smoothness, Bounds, Supermartingale Approach).
Denoting $\mu = 1000$ (mean claim), $F(y) = 1 - e^{-y/\mu}$ for $y \geq 0$, so $\mathrm{d}F(y) = \frac{1}{\mu} e^{-y/\mu} \mathrm{d}y$, and
$$
\frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial t} - c \frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial x} + \lambda \varphi(x, t) =
\frac{\lambda}{\mu} \int_0^x \varphi(x-y, t) e^{-y/\mu} \mathrm{d} y.
$$
This integral can be simplified using the properties of convolution:
$$
\int_0^x \varphi(x-y, t) e^{-y/\mu} \mathrm{d} y =
\int_0^x \varphi(y, t) e^{-(x-y)/\mu} \mathrm{d} y =
e^{-x/\mu} \int_0^x \varphi(y, t) e^{y/\mu} \mathrm{d} y,
$$
so the final form of the equation is
$$
\begin{cases}
\frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial t} - c \frac{\partial \varphi(x, t)}{\partial x} + \lambda \varphi(x, t) = \frac{\lambda}{\mu} e^{-x/\mu} \int_0^x \varphi(y, t) e^{y/\mu} \mathrm{d} y, \\
\varphi(x, 0) = 1, \;\lim_{x\to+\infty} \varphi(x, t) = 1,
\end{cases}
$$
and the value you need is $\varphi(0, 4)$.
Finding exact solution to this type of equations is quite complicated, and I'm not sure it can be solved in this particular case (although it's relatively easy to find an exact solution for infinite horizon case with exponentially distributed claims), so numerical methods may be the only option.
EDIT. In fact, there exists a rather cumbersome explicit formula for $\psi(u,t) = 1 - \varphi(u,t)$ for exponentially distributed claims (see Statistical Tools for Finance and Insurance, p. 368). Assuming that $c = 1$ and $\beta = \frac{1}{\mu} = 1$ (exponential distribution is defined here to have CDF $1-e^{-\beta x}$ for $x \geq 0$),
$$
\psi(u, T)=\lambda e^{-(1-\lambda) u}-\frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\pi \frac{f_1(x, u, T) f_2(x, u)}{f_3(x)} \mathrm{d} x,
$$
where
$$
f_1(x, u, T)=\lambda \exp \{2 \sqrt{\lambda} T \cos x-(1+\lambda) T+u(\sqrt{\lambda} \cos x-1)\}, \\
f_2(x, u) = \cos (u \sqrt{\lambda} \sin x)-\cos (u \sqrt{\lambda} \sin x+2 x), \\
f_3(x) = 1+\lambda-2 \sqrt{\lambda} \cos x.
$$
If $\beta \neq 1$ and $c \neq 1$, than $\lambda$ should be replaced with $\frac{\lambda}{\beta c} = \frac{\lambda \mu}{c}$, $u$ with $\beta u = u/\mu$, and $T$ with $\beta c T = \frac{c}{\mu} T$. So, the final formula is
$$
\psi(u, T)=\lambda e^{-\left(1-\frac{\lambda \mu}{c}\right) u}-\frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\pi \frac{f_1(x, u/\mu, cT/\mu) f_2(x, u/\mu)}{f_3(x)} \mathrm{d} x,
$$
and the integral can be calculated numerically.
For given values of $\lambda = 10$, $\mu = 1000$, $c = 11000$, $\frac{\lambda\mu}{c} = \frac{10}{11}$, so
$$
\psi(0,4) = \frac{\lambda\mu}{c} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\pi \frac{f_1(x, 0, cT/\mu) f_2(x, 0)}{f_3(x)} \mathrm{d} x = \\ =
\frac{10}{11} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\pi
\frac{10 e^{-84 + 8\sqrt{110} \cos x}(1-\cos 2x)}{21 - 22 \sqrt{\frac{10}{11}} \cos x} \mathrm{d}x,
$$
and approximate value given by Wolfram is $0.863789$, meaning that $\varphi(0,4) \approx 0.136211$, which is quite close to your number obtained from simulation.
At least, this is my interpretation, but I'm a bit rusty on this stuff :).
– dmk Dec 30 '23 at 13:57