Allianz Commissions Rates

I like the liquidity in the BCA contract, and so far I like the schiller index a bit better. 2 year ptp as well.

Brother SD:

On the two year point to point. . .

Why would we put a client into a policy with this zebra?

Using an example of a monthly PTP. . . lessay we sell a client on a two year monthly or yearly PTP FIA or IUL tomorrow.

The market is currently in a correction and it DROPS 50% in year one and recovers 10% in year two.

(and the fact that point-to-point with a cap. . . caps the gain AND DOESNT cap the losses over the months or years)

Overall the two years, the client receives 0% in year one, and 0% in year two with the two year point to point due to the 40% loss.

. . . and the client with the one year PTP receives 0% in year one, and 10% in year two due to the 10% gain. . .

If I understand this correctly, as far as yield and growth, doesn't keeping our clients away from these zebra configurations make more sense?

Please correct me if I have this wrong,

Tevis
 
Last edited:
Hey Ray

What about the 222 for income (and increasing income)? It has the +50% crediting even after income is turned on? I know Allianz is not the preferred choice right now for growth, but seems they have a decent few products for income.

What companies/products do you like for increasing income? Not early on, more likely after some deferral (say waiting 7-10yrs) ?

222 can be decent for rising income. Also DB. Rising income normally can be augmented with the securities side of the portfolio...these are still fixed products that I compare to bonds and pensions so upside (and rising income) is somewhat limited no matter which way you slice it.
 
That is basically every IA on the market.... a few only go up to 5%... but most go up to 10% per year.

I meant that you can take a 5% withdrawal immediately. If someone wants to take income right away, but they are a few years away from a step up in the payout factor, often time you can get your clients a higher income stream by taking withdrawals the first few years and then turning on the income rider.

Nationwide on the other hand does not allow withdrawals in the first year, and is only 7% a year after that.

----------

I'm assuming he just meant there's something available year 1 and comparing to Nationwide at 7%.

You totally get me man(said in a hippie voice)
 
Brother SD:

On the two year point to point. . .

Why would we put a client into a policy with this zebra?

Using an example of a monthly PTP. . . lessay we sell a client on a two year monthly or yearly PTP FIA or IUL tomorrow.

The market is currently in a correction and it DROPS 50% in year one and recovers 10% in year two.

(and the fact that point-to-point with a cap. . . caps the gain AND DOESNT cap the losses over the months or years)

Overall the two years, the client receives 0% in year one, and 0% in year two with the two year point to point due to the 40% loss.

. . . and the client with the one year PTP receives 0% in year one, and 10% in year two due to the 10% gain. . .

If I understand this correctly, as far as yield and growth, doesn't keeping our clients away from these zebra configurations make more sense?

Please correct me if I have this wrong,

Tevis

You have it right assuming all of the terms are the same (caps, participation, spreads, indexes).

But they normally are not.

If the 1 year p2p has a low cap but the 2 yr p2p has a reasonable spread and the market goes up two years in a row, guess which one wins?

Also, on several of the newer products, the strongest index choice with the best terms may be on the 2yr or 3yr p2p.

I understand your point but you can choose more than one crediting option to offset this issue. Also, the carrier can normally only change the terms per segment so 2 and 3 yr p2p do give them fewer bites at the apple to increase spreads/reduce caps.
 
Brother SD:

On the two year point to point. . .

Why would we put a client into a policy with this zebra?

Using an example of a monthly PTP. . . lessay we sell a client on a two year monthly or yearly PTP FIA or IUL tomorrow.

The market is currently in a correction and it DROPS 50% in year one and recovers 10% in year two.

(and the fact that point-to-point with a cap. . . caps the gain AND DOESNT cap the losses over the months or years)

Overall the two years, the client receives 0% in year one, and 0% in year two with the two year point to point due to the 40% loss.

. . . and the client with the one year PTP receives 0% in year one, and 10% in year two due to the 10% gain. . .

If I understand this correctly, as far as yield and growth, doesn't keeping our clients away from these zebra configurations make more sense?

Please correct me if I have this wrong,

Tevis
I mean Ray essentially answered the question already. There are advantages and disadvantages to anything. If you can find a worth while index with 100-120% par with no spread or fee based off annual pt to pt then more power to ya. Since New Heights has the optional lock-in that helps overcome that objection. Also it's nice that when talking about Lifetime income, 3 year point to point means nothing since its the highest daily value. Same with Death Benefit.
 
Thank you my wise brothers for the clarification. I come from banking, and am relatively new to the fixed index annuity/life game.

In banking there was/is sleight of hand. We quote interest rate and hide garbage fees (points) in the fine print. It got so bad the the feds stepped in and invoked the Truth-In-Lending Act.

. . . I think that these carriers are playing fast and loose with revolving caps, participation, and spreads. . .

. . .and keeping us agents guessing as to which is the flavor of the day!

I am watching and learning!

Gud Bidness all!
 
Back
Top