I’m not in favor of IULs.

[scagnt83]

one is not better than the other. Client needs/wants should dictate what the solutions are for that specific client, not yours or my personal affection for our own purchases or in most cases the producers use of only a hammer as a tool because they have chosen to only have a hammer in their toolbox

You have to actually understand how the product works before you can discern those things for a client.

Currently to him, he has a hammer and everything is a nail, no matter what the client says.

 

[scagnt83]

Again, I was the client in that scenario. He literally lied about the history of IULs.

But generally speaking, yes, there is always a context.

Here we go. An agent lied to you about IUL and you think its snake oil because of that.

Now you dont even attempt to actually learn what the product is and how it works in an objective and unbiased way.

You are literally just trying to validate your bias by this thread.

 

[scagnt83]

If you're bragging about 0% years then in no way did your IUL perform as illustrated. THIS is my point. The biggest question is 30 yrs from now. Your IULs haven't been tested yet in a full life span. We already know they aren't performing as illustrated… and that's on the front end of things.

And yes, I did mention renewal rates early on in this thread. That's a huge deal… was it you or someone else who gave the example of the 90 yr old and cash value compensating for a cheaper insurance cost?

The thing with WL is you know up front what the future holds. No 11th hour grenade drops.

Those IULs performed better than illustrated.

If you knew how to illustrate an IUL, you would know that returns shown on illustrations are limited to below the Annual Cap. I was selling 14% annual caps but illustrating 6%-7% on the illustration.

Those clients are very happy. And those policies are well above the original illustrations.

We have had a bull market for the past 20 years, IUL has killed it during that time. Even the ones that had Caps reduced, even the ones that didnt DCA and had bad market timing. As long as the agent overfunded properly, they are well above the original illustrations.

You are so far off its comical.

 

[scagnt83]

That's fair and I largely agree. I just find it interesting when talking with people who claim his IUL is WL on steroids won't produce the illustration (privately). I want to learn more as well and want to clear blind spots. Thus far, in my research I haven't been impressed at all with IUL. I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise.

Notice you left something out of that statement.

Its not about the indexing.

UNIVERSAL LIFE is WL on steroids.

Its the internal mechanics of the 7702 test. Not the indexing.

I have said this over and over, and you keep ignoring it. So your actions say you dont have a single intent to learn a thing. You are here to validate your bias.

 

[Allen Trent]

Those clients are very happy. And those policies are well above the original illustrations.

And good luck finding an active dividend paying WL policy issued since about 1950 that has performed to illustrated dividend scale. Mine certainly hasnt, nor has most any I have seen. Hopefully, that tide will turn with the much lower illustrated dividend scales in the most recent decade that hopefully are sustainable long term & have a chance to even be credited higher than illustrated at issue

 

[scagnt83]

And good luck finding an active dividend paying WL policy issued since about 1950 that has performed to illustrated dividend scale. Mine certainly hasnt, nor has most any I have seen. Hopefully, that tide will turn with the much lower illustrated dividend scales in the most recent decade that hopefully are sustainable long term & have a chance to even be credited higher than illustrated at issue

Yep. Literally every WL sold since the mid 90s has performed lower than the sales illustration. Penn had a good run over a decade with a steady dividend, but even those eventually saw a drop.

IUL is literally the only life insurance product that has exceeded illustrated rates on a consistent basis. And while I would never set expectations for that, it says a lot.

I own WL, so I hope WL dividends go up in the future as well. I own IUL, so I hope Caps stay at a reasonable rate moving forward.... hopefully even moving back up a bit eventually. Higher interest rates benefit IUL just as much as WL, especially IULs that use a portfolio rate and are not block specific on renewals.

 

[REI_Velocity]

Notice you left something out of that statement.

Its not about the indexing.

UNIVERSAL LIFE is WL on steroids.

Its the internal mechanics of the 7702 test. Not the indexing.

I have said this over and over, and you keep ignoring it. So your actions say you dont have a single intent to learn a thing. You are here to validate your bias.

I obviously hit a nerve. I'm not attacking your love for IUL. But no agent says "I'm selling crap on purpose." So pardon me if I ask for some proof as I haven't had one agent give me any in several years. You're basically telling me in so many words, "just trust me, bro… you're dumb and ignorant but trust me! I know." I've never met you and don't know anything about you other than your posts the past few days. You started off fine. Then you got personal. What gives?

I'm happy to review some of your work if you want to pm me.

 

[DHK]

I obviously hit a nerve. I'm not attacking your love for IUL. But no agent says "I'm selling crap on purpose." So pardon me if I ask for some proof as I haven't had one agent give me any in several years. You're basically telling me in so many words, "just trust me, bro… you're dumb and ignorant but trust me! I know." I've never met you and don't know anything about you other than your posts the past few days. You started off fine. Then you got personal. What gives?

You didn't pay attention to the key terms on how to make it work.

Let me help you:

GPT is the main difference that creates this, but also the ability to switch from Opt 2 to Opt 1.

You have some homework to do. You get to prove it to yourself.

Look up GPT vs CVAT and then review policy structures under DB option 1 vs DB option 2.

Believe me, you need to do the work with SOME company's software. Create a spreadsheet and compare it all for a given premium and how the policy will perform.

 

[DHK]

Here, I'll help you a bit:

From HS 323 - Individual Life Insurance from The American College:

cash value accumulation test
The first test, the cash value accumulation test, generally applies to more traditional cash value policies, such as whole life policies. Under this cash value accumulation test, the cash value generally may not exceed the net single premium that would be needed to fund the policy's death benefit. The insurance company calculates the net single premium using an assumed interest rate and certain mortality charges.

guideline premium and corridor test
The second, two-pronged test is the guideline premium and corridor test. Policies that are designed to pass the guideline premium and corridor test must meet both of the requirements.

The guideline premium requirement limits the total premium that may be paid into the policy at any given time. This limit varies with each life insurance company based on its own expenses and its own mortality experience. The limit also varies with the insurer's own interest assumptions, subject to specified IRS limits. The policy meets the corridor or death benefit requirement, the second prong of the test, if the contract's death benefit exceeds a specified multiple of its cash value at all times. This multiple varies according to the insured's attained age. Generally, universal life and other similar types of policies are tested under this second, two-pronged test.


But without doing your own illustrations and testing how each of these work, you really won't know.

 

[REI_Velocity]

You didn't pay attention to the key terms on how to make it work.

Let me help you:


You have some homework to do. You get to prove it to yourself.

Look up GPT vs CVAT and then review policy structures under DB option 1 vs DB option 2.

Believe me, you need to do the work with SOME company's software. Create a spreadsheet and compare it all for a given premium and how the policy will perform.

As I've mentioned several times now, I've seen so many of these and those who say they make the best "IULs on steroids" won't show their work. I'm just trying to see the purple unicorn. I want to be a believer, I really do.

I'm not sure why this is so alarming. Asking for proof doesn't negate the fact of what I do or do not know. No matter what I come up with, even if I studied this for 10 years straight, the response will always be "you're not doing it right!" Not my first rodeo. Ha. Numbers don't lie, people do. I look at the numbers. I want to see the best IULs there are in the industry. I've been told I have seen them, and they've been far from compelling.


I guess you guys don't believe me when I say I've compared a ton of these. I'm not your typical life insurance salesman.