Guardian or Penn Whole life

carriers cannot dip into your base policy CV for anything.

If I stated "guaranteed assumption" I didn't mean to. but I don't believe I said that.

They cannot dip into base policy CV but can they dip into non-guaranteed CV?

"Guaranteed assumption" is the wording used in Penn illustrations. Not something you said.
 
My clients with Penn are very close. Just did an annual review, client has almost $43k cash value and even with a direct recognition loan out of over $22k (for real estate renovation project) and the reduction in company dividend this year...he's still within about 1% of the original illustration. All the companies I have used...none have been exact. Most are close, assuming the funding is as shown on the illustration and dividend the same.

Re the "guaranteed assumptions" wording on the illustration.... I don't know for sure, but I believe what it means is: assuming you fund as outlined, here is where you will be. There is no way to know if the client will fund exactly, especially if PUA's are used and loans are available. Most illustrations also use an 'assumption' of when payment will be made, etc. If the client funds premiums at the end of the month each month, and the illustration assumes payment was made on the first of the month, it will be a tiny bit off at the end of the year.

Lots of great companies. They all have pro's and con's - no single company is the best for every client and every situation. Go do what you like. I don't bash any of them and use several on a regular basis. I've learned in this business.... you can take ANY company or ANY product and spin it in a positive light, or paint it as pretty grim. Like you hear all the time that Guardian has an 8% interest rate on policy loans. That is 40-60% higher than most other companies. That's not the whole story, yet just comparing apples to apples on that one thing....that's an easy one to run them down with.

I would suggest having several go-to companies. I just had to switch a client from one to another because they were giving me a fit during underwriting.
 
They cannot dip into base policy CV but can they dip into non-guaranteed CV?

"Guaranteed assumption" is the wording used in Penn illustrations. Not something you said.

nope, they may not take anything from any portion of your policy that has already been credited. So, all piled up previously credited dividends in addition to the base policy CV are yours. only you can mess those up with loans, surrenders, loan interest charge. the only control a carrier has is future dividends. But even then, with a mutual carrier, you are preferred member, so you participate in the investment earnings they don't have free reign without oversight to merely drop dividends, but they can be impacted when the carrier experiences higher expenses, worse mortality & lower returns. Long term interest rates has been the biggest culprit in the recent dividend declines.

https://www.insuranceandestates.com/top-10-best-dividend-paying-whole-life-insurance-companies/

http://docs.mfin.com/mintelligence/Mutual Life Dividend Rates 2018.pdf

Northwestern Mutual Dividend and Crediting Rates Drop, Expenses Rise
 
That document shoots his own claim in the foot about Guardian delivering "closer to illustrated" than Penn. And I believe that appears to just be a base only policy, which is fine. The real power of generating cv is in PUA riders and design.

On the 45yo Guardian illustrated $297k cash value, and delivered $203k.
Penn illustrated $216k and delivered $203k.

If I'm a 55yo and bought that particular example, Guardian illustrated $421k and delivered $293k. Penn illustrated $291k and delivered $290k. Regardless of what the IRR ended up being, I'm pissed in that example

I have seen all sorts of documents that cherry pick parameters to make a particular company or product look good or bad - or GREAT or TERRIBLE. Every company does that with their own products. That chart is 15years old also.

Again, alot of solid companies and products. I'm guessing this is a Guardian rep showing you this info.

Are you an ins agent, or a client looking to buy an ins policy?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DHK
That chart is misleading for one simple reason: The premiums being compared are not equal across the board. It's solving for a death benefit, not projecting cash value accumulations for an even amount.

Get a REAL and CURRENT set of illustrations based on the premiums you want to pay, if you're going to do a comparison for cash value accumulation.
 
Wow, at a certain point, I think the OP is just afraid to pull the trigger. You're splitting hairs on a fly's ass at some point here. The fact is with all the companies involved in this conversation, you're going to do OK.

I used to be NYL, still own my NYL as there was no reason to cancel them because I went independent. I currently am Licensed with Guardian, why? because they are of similar WL quality as NYL and they let independents write for them. I tell WL clients up front I write Guardian because they don't lock me into them exclusively. They could find similar success with NWM, Mass M, NYL and others. I just don't write them.

If they want a relationship with me, that's who I write for WL. I've been doing this long enough not to sell an illustration as the reason for the sale. I sell the concept of WL and yea, it works with all of them. Dividends are going to be a result of investment earnings, mortality expenses and operating expenses. They will be up, down or as projected year by year. The illustration is an educated guess and why everybody in this business kisses the asses of actuaries.

While I am certain all this detail may matter to somebody, usually it is for people trying to find a reason not to buy. Good luck to the OP and god let's hope you have a defined benefit plan, cause God help you if you have a defined contribution one.
 
Wow, at a certain point, I think the OP is just afraid to pull the trigger. You're splitting hairs on a fly's ass at some point here. The fact is with all the companies involved in this conversation, you're going to do OK.

I used to be NYL, still own my NYL as there was no reason to cancel them because I went independent. I currently am Licensed with Guardian, why? because they are of similar WL quality as NYL and they let independents write for them. I tell WL clients up front I write Guardian because they don't lock me into them exclusively. They could find similar success with NWM, Mass M, NYL and others. I just don't write them.

If they want a relationship with me, that's who I write for WL. I've been doing this long enough not to sell an illustration as the reason for the sale. I sell the concept of WL and yea, it works with all of them. Dividends are going to be a result of investment earnings, mortality expenses and operating expenses. They will be up, down or as projected year by year. The illustration is an educated guess and why everybody in this business kisses the asses of actuaries.

While I am certain all this detail may matter to somebody, usually it is for people trying to find a reason not to buy. Good luck to the OP and god let's hope you have a defined benefit plan, cause God help you if you have a defined contribution one.
Why don't you tell me how to pick a company and design a WL?
 
Why don't you tell me how to pick a company and design a WL?


Well not licensed in Indiana and I think you're an agent basically pulling people's legs here. Why haven't you once mentioned how much coverage you need? How old are you? What's your health like? weight? All these ideas and concerns really don't matter if you're table rated. If that's the case, you should be more concerned that somebody takes you.

I don't spend a lot of time in situations like this as they rarely amount to getting a client. Besides I think you're an agent at this point.
 
I am not an agent. I am just looking to buy a whole life policy because I like the guarantees. I AM working with an agent who showed Mass, guardian and penn but started pushing guardian more even though I liked Penn and that's when I began to research and found this forum. I am just looking to get a second opinion from people who are knowledgeable and who don't mind sharing their knowledge. That's all.

In that report I uploaded, Penn actually performed very close to the projected IRR. But then, IRR is inbuilt in the policy. If the policy is designed well with less DB, then the IRR will be more. I am not buying my agent's statement that all companies project higher and the actual cash values will be less regardless of dividend. Does he mean, even if dividend increases, actual cash values will be less? That doesn't make sense.

If at my age 60, I have 1 million as my cash value and the company declares 6% dividend, will there be $1,060,000 the next year? That's all I am trying to make sure.
 
Back
Top