Immediate Income

Im well aware of the Income Rider Options out there and the benefits they have. It just seemed like a question geared more towards SPIAs. So that is how I answered it.

And no, it is not just about the total amount of income, features and carrier strength are important. But there are plenty of extremely strong SPIA carriers who have been in the top 10 over the past 6 months.
Most of the top SPIA rates recently have been from A rated carriers. So the company strength issue is usually a non-issue in the spia space. ANICO, Guardian, Met, LFG, ING, Pac, NYL; all of these have had strong spia rates over the past 6 months.


I used the term "fun" loosely. But it seems (from previous threads) that the poster I responded to enjoys researching his investments and directing his investment decisions. Which is why in his case I used the word fun.

But also from a total risk tolerance perspective, if you decrease risk in one bucket, it gives you the potential opportunity to increase the risk in another bucket. That is assuming that you want to keep your total risk at the same level. As most of us know though, many people are looking to decrease overall risk, and use a SPIA or GLWB Rider to achieve that.

There is also the pure numbers side of the comment... if it takes less of your assets to produce X amount of income, then that leaves a greater portion to be used to meet other goals. Those were my main points.



And if you would like to share what products you feel are best for immediate income Im sure the forum members would much rather you share with everybody here on this thread!


The question was what do people feel is best for immediate income and why would you use it; not why are SPIA's a good option. SPIA's used-to-be primarily used to generate a "lifetime income"; however, as products have evolved over the last 5+ years there is less reason to use them. Specifically to my comment, things like age, and health may be important factors because many of the FIA products with guaranteed lifetime income benefits stop issuing policies at the age of 80 (Great American and F&G {F&G would be a secondary option in my opinion to Great American!} have compelling income/death benefits up to age 85) So for a client over the age of 90"might" be a slightly better option, but even at that age, there is such little internal growth in a SPIA that the client might as well but the money into a no risk holding place and simply draw down on the principle. The other reason to use a SPIA would possibly be to fund a lifetime pay life policy. (I have other recommendations on this though)

To get into specific products that allow lifetime income to be triggered immediately and to ALSO provide true inflation protection, the options are limited to basically one specific carrier; Allianz. If the income doesn't need to be triggered immediately, then there are many more that allow for the "lifetime income guarantees" however no other carrier is offering true inflation protection for life. American Equity (which I love and write by the way) does not really offer a true inflation protection option. They offer Income Option #2 which is a 1% reduction in the starting payout percentage, then continues to grow at a steady rate of 3% during the distribution phase, however only until the Accumulation Value is exhausted. Also, because the client is starting at a lesser payout percentage (1% less) the client receives less income for 9 years than if they would have selected the normal Option #1. Because the client received less income over that initial 9 year period, it's not until the 16th year of the distribution phase that the client finally receives a cumulative amount of money that is actually greater. So, with American Equity's LIBR the client would need to be confident that they will be alive and receiving income longer than 16 years to have Option 2 "the inflation option with AEI" be a better choice. I believe there are other carriers that offer a similar increase over time, but no carrier links the direct index gains to the client's income every year for life. (even when the annuity's Accumulation Value is drawn down to $0.00) Allianz has kind of coin phrased the term "an increasing income off of a decreasing asset." If you aren't familiar with the Allianz products there are two different platforms now. Allianz has their standard products and a new Preferred Product line. Going back several years to products like the Endurance Plus, the MasterDex 5 Plus, and even the MasterDex X which are all standard products offer increasing income based off the products index returns once the client triggers the lifetime income. With the new Preferred products there is one in particular that has been getting a ton of premium (I believe close to 80%+ of their new business) called the 360. (they have a product called the 222 that provides an additional LTC type benefit also.) There are several products that allow the client to trigger lifetime income immediately. The MasterDex 5 plus is a product that’s been out a long time, same goes for the MasterDex X with the additional rider, and now the newer (and honestly much better) 360, and the Core Income 7.
 
You can sell as much of an ETF as you want. Like owning a stock.

Yes I know. My point is that when you design a Retirement Income Stream traditional financial planning theory has 2 main ways to do this:
1. Bucket Method.
Where you usually have 3 buckets that you spend down over 3 phases of Retirement.
2. The 4% withdrawal method.
This is the most common and what I was referring to.
This is the highly replicated study that showed if you withdraw 4% per year, from a balanced 50/50 portfolio of stocks & bonds. You have a 96% chance of not outliving your savings over a 30 year retirement.
Some studies even showed that 5% was acceptable to use.

The 4% method is by far the most widely accepted method of ensuring a retirement income that you will not outlive (from a traditional equity portfolio).

However, over the past 13 years that method has not fared as well. Which is why many institutions and brokerage firms have released "revised" studies on this that show a 2%-3.5% (depending on the firm) is optimal for the volatile market we have seen over the past 10+ years.


Accumulation is barely half the battle. Distribution is the hard part.
Most people do not realize the impact that one single -10% year can have on your retirement savings. But at a 4% withdrawal rate, it will take around 3 years of constant 10% gains just to catch back up.
The key to distribution is consistency in returns. Statistically, an equity portfolio often does a poor job at that.

Im not saying not to own equities at all. But you just need to be aware of the downsides of using them to distribute retirement income. You especially need to be aware of proper risk allocation if you use equities for retirement income.... most people are way too overexposed after age 60. Oct 2008 proved that beyond a doubt. That is why many who where actually retired and drawing income during all of that, now see great value in the income options annuities provide. They provide the foundation that the rest of your retirement assets sit on.
 
You can sell as much of an ETF as you want. Like owning a stock.

Since the conversation has been around spias one might assume they are speaking of guaranteed lifetime income. Yes you can sell as much of an EFT as you want but can you guarantee not running out of funds before death?
 
Since the conversation has been around spias one might assume they are speaking of guaranteed lifetime income. Yes you can sell as much of an EFT as you want but can you guarantee not running out of funds before death?
That's when the government takes over. Get on welfare.
I just think that annuities are poor investments overall. The purchase of an annuity usually results in a wealth transfer of as much as 15 - 20% from the investor to the insurance company and sales agents. Over long time periods (which is what we are talking about) markets recover from corrections. The type of person who would consider an annuity would probably be 50% stocks / 50% bonds in a separate account. That means they aren't going to lose their shirt in a major market decline AND with a separate account they have the ability to rebalance by taking more risk when the market eventually bounces back. You also rebalance as stocks start outperforming bonds. This is something that is never quantified in studies that compare fixed income investments to normal separate account portfolios like simple stock and bond ETF's.
 
Last edited:
What is everyone using for immediate income these days? What steers you in that direction?

SanDiego619 - Feel free to call me if you are looking for SPIA options or annuities in general. Everybody can go back and forth on here about what is best, but what really matters is the specifics of the case and what the best option for the client is going to be.
 
SanDiego619 - Feel free to call me if you are looking for SPIA options or annuities in general. Everybody can go back and forth on here about what is best, but what really matters is the specifics of the case and what the best option for the client is going to be.

He is a marketer for an IMO. Not an agent with a case.
 
Who is the marketer? SanDiego? Well nevermind then.. I thought you were really looking for options. lol
I am not a "marketer," but yes I do work for an FMO. As I have stated a few times, I am on here to learn. I don't need someone who doesn't know me answering for me (not you). There's no hidden adgenda by asking the question. The whole point was to spark debate and understand people's thought process on choice. I get that it was a VERY general question but it seems like at least a couple have answered successfully. Thanks for offering the help though!
 
I am not a "marketer," but yes I do work for an FMO. As I have stated a few times, I am on here to learn. I don't need someone who doesn't know me answering for me (not you).

Wow, you are really here to make friends aren't you....
My point was that you work for a marketing organization. So you are not an agent who is looking for a product solution for a case (like Scott thought you were).

I made no suggestion of your agenda. Only stated the fact that your not an agent looking for a solution for a client. I did this because Scott was under the impression that was the case.

Merry Christmas my friend.
 
Wow, you are really here to make friends aren't you....
My point was that you work for a marketing organization. So you are not an agent who is looking for a product solution for a case (like Scott thought you were).

I made no suggestion of your agenda. Only stated the fact that your not an agent looking for a solution for a client. I did this because Scott was under the impression that was the case.

Merry Christmas my friend.

I must be missing something here. Are we all trolling for business here, or are we supposed to be discussing/educating ourselves about annuity products and benefits for our clients? Agent or "Marketer" shouldn't make a difference as long as the facts about product and planning advice is sound. Also, this isn't facebook, no one here is "friends" why don't you address my post since I seem to be the only one here with actual annuity product advice and a solution to the originial question. I would have thought with the number of "posts" and I'd assume many more replies, there would be more focus on annuities and education/sharing than people getting all emotional.....

Also, if this guy is a "Marketer" wouldn't he ALWAYS be giving solutions for clients. They may not be his personal clients, but when I've spoke to "Marketers" from IMO/FMO's they usually always ask "What's your client trying to do? What's their goal with this money?" I'd also imagine that as an IMO/FMO they are in front of all the best product options all day! (That's their job; like creating relationships with clients is our job.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top