Aviva Indexed Universal Life

AtlantaLife&Health

Guru
100+ Post Club
376
Do any of you guys know what the rate of return has been for clients with IUL's through Aviva? Please share the rates of return for the past few years or more to give me an idea. Are any of you doing anything with this product? I'm not appointed with them yet. Trying to see how good of a product it would be to sell.
 
I'm not an indexed UL fan, but even I'll tell you experience is there are better contracts out there.
 
Ditto. The "real rate of return" on policy cash values isn't realized by what it does while sitting in the policy, but what can be done with the cash values outside the policy, including the ease and efficiency by which you can move money in and out of the policy. Point is for me... trying to "juice" the percieved IRR on a policy through indexing isn't the way to go.

Having said that, Aviva isn't what AmerUs used to be. AmerUs was created when Central Life and American Mutual merged. in the mid to late 90's AmerUs was considered a pretty good company.

No charge for all the info you didn't ask for.;)
 
Do any of you guys know what the rate of return has been for clients with IUL's through Aviva? Please share the rates of return for the past few years or more to give me an idea.


Rate of return on an IUL will depend on lots of different factors (the same goes for any UL or par WL really)

Underwriting decision, how much over funded, riders chosen, age, DB option, testing option (1, 2, 3 etc), index crediting options, and index options will all affect the internal return/return on distributions on an IUL.

What I look at is the rate cap history on the yearly point to point and/or 2 year p2p, along with the monthly caps.

You also need to look at the fee schedule of the policy, DB options, and distribution oriented riders available as well.


If I remember right, Aviva does not give you a guaranteed minimum crediting rate if the index fails to perform (or there was some reason I didnt like the product.... im pretty sure that was it...); to me thats a definite deal breaker.

Look at LFG and Penn
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


trying to "juice" the percieved IRR on a policy through indexing isn't the way to go.


How exactly is Indexing "juicing" a policy?

You are basically making a bet that the index will give you a better crediting rate over an extended period than interest rates will.

Its a similar train of thought that a well established mutual insurance company can give a higher dividend over an extended period than what other companies can in interest rates.

Or the train of thought that an indexed annuity will yield higher rates than a traditional fixed annuity.

Not sure what part of that is "juicing"... its a way to hedge risk while still having the ability to recognize enhanced returns.

And a well designed, good quality IUL performs just as well as a WL during distribution... many times better since you can use the GPT option with an IUL and with WL you are locked into CVAT.

But when even comparing IUL to traditional UL, many IULs have lower fees in the later years when distributions are usually taken.
 
Last edited:
How exactly is Indexing "juicing" a policy?

You are basically making a bet that the index will give you a better crediting rate over an extended period than interest rates will.

Its a similar train of thought that a well established mutual insurance company can give a higher dividend over an extended period than what other companies can in interest rates.

Or the train of thought that an indexed annuity will yield higher rates than a traditional fixed annuity.

Not sure what part of that is "juicing"... its a way to hedge risk while still having the ability to recognize enhanced returns.

And a well designed, good quality IUL performs just as well as a WL during distribution... many times better since you can use the GPT option with an IUL and with WL you are locked into CVAT.

But when even comparing IUL to traditional UL, many IULs have lower fees in the later years when distributions are usually taken.
My reference to "juicing" is when an agent believes and conveys to a prospect that an indexed product provides all the market upside with none of the market downside. I'm sure there are agents (you included) who understand participation rates, caps, crediting methods, etc and do a good job explaining all this to clients, keeping suitability in mind.

Even if the historical numbers validate the performance of indexed products compared to traditional ones, I see indexed products across the board to be the most misunderstood, confusing, and poorly comunicated product in the industry. While I don't want FINRA more in my business than they already are, I believe some of the worst cases of financial rape are done with EI products and the agents doing it need to be held to a higher standard than their state insurance department.
 
My reference to "juicing" is when an agent believes and conveys to a prospect that an indexed product provides all the market upside with none of the market downside. I'm sure there are agents (you included) who understand participation rates, caps, crediting methods, etc and do a good job explaining all this to clients, keeping suitability in mind.

Even if the historical numbers validate the performance of indexed products compared to traditional ones, I see indexed products across the board to be the most misunderstood, confusing, and poorly comunicated product in the industry. While I don't want FINRA more in my business than they already are, I believe some of the worst cases of financial rape are done with EI products and the agents doing it need to be held to a higher standard than their state insurance department.


I see where your coming from, and agree with you mostly.

Indexed products are certainly one of the more complex products out there, and along with that makes them one of the more misunderstood products.

And yes, lots of agents do misrepresent what they do, with phrases such as "all the upside and non of the downside" etc. etc. etc.

When indexed annuities came about, there where some really shoddy products being pushed by the likes of Alliance and others... and they where sold with sales lines like the one above... and they where pushed so hard because of very large commissions..

Products have improved since then, but unfortunately there are still agents who misrepresent them.

But imo, there are way more stock brokers who place clients in inappropriate asset allocations, than there are agents who misrepresent indexed products.
 
We use Aviva quite a bit for tough underwriting cases...
We could care less about the indexing... it's all about the no lapse guarantees and the 3 table shave program they have.
 
We use Aviva quite a bit for tough underwriting cases...
We could care less about the indexing... it's all about the no lapse guarantees and the 3 table shave program they have.


Are you saying that the Aviva IUL has a no lapse guarantee? Or that you use their GUL product?
 
The Advantage Builder Series III has a no-lapse guarantee and is an IUL. I didn't know they also had a table shave program for it.


Interesting, thanks.

I dont really think that an IUL should need a no lapse guarantee.
An IUL should be bought for someone who is CV focused with the policy, so the policy should be overfunded as much as possible. A max overfunded IUL should get you to 121 on the guaranteed side anyways.

Aviva doesnt give a min guaranteed crediting rate... am I correct in saying this??
If so, the NLG makes sense I guess.
 
Back
Top