- 10,805
5% first year and 10% after. Maybe liquidity is not the right word
That is basically every IA on the market.... a few only go up to 5%... but most go up to 10% per year.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
5% first year and 10% after. Maybe liquidity is not the right word
I'm assuming he just meant there's something available year 1 and comparing to Nationwide at 7%.That is basically every IA on the market.... a few only go up to 5%... but most go up to 10% per year.
I like the liquidity in the BCA contract, and so far I like the schiller index a bit better. 2 year ptp as well.
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) ?
That is basically every IA on the market.... a few only go up to 5%... but most go up to 10% per year.
I'm assuming he just meant there's something available year 1 and comparing to Nationwide at 7%.
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.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