IUL Illustration Interest Rates

Discussion in 'Indexed Universal Life Forum' started by aus0417, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. VolAgent
    Online

    VolAgent Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    13,167
    Likes Received:
    13
    State:
    Tennessee
    I wouldn't frame it that way. If you pick one because "its better", it will disappoint the client and you'll get blamed.

    Instead, frame it as a choice for the client.

    A) I have a product that has a greater upside potential. But, the market may not do what we need to get you higher credited interest.

    OR

    B) I have a product that is nice and steady and should crank out decent cash value growth for years to come. It will never have the highs, but then it won't have the lows either, just nice and steady.

    OR

    C) We can do half the premium into each and give you a bit of both.

    If the client picks, he owns it and has bought into it. Plus, you aren't a named defendant down the road.
     
  2. BNTRS
    Offline

    BNTRS Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,658
    Likes Received:
    0
    State:
    Vermont
    I too would love to see the piece about a 99% probabilility of averaging 7% (I suppose we're talking at least 7% as exactly 7% would be much much less). The probability of averaging at least 7% on the S&P is much much less than 99%. Assuming we're talking Geomtetric Average (aka CAGR). We could be talking the Artihmetic Average which would be easier to achieve, and is also incredibly misleading.

    Looky here (I'm becoming such a whore about this)

    WL will traditionally outperform UL db wise (PUA's compound death benefit as well as cash). The guaranteed cash side will always go to WL (that was a point someone I know loves to bring up, forget the hypothetical lets compare the guarantee!).

    Now, blend that WL contract and load it up with more PUA's and compare the two. It'll pull back the db performance, but cash will take a leap.
     
  3. VolAgent
    Online

    VolAgent Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    13,167
    Likes Received:
    13
    State:
    Tennessee
    It may have been lower, may have been in the 6% range. I just remember the piece. It showed several percentages and the probabilities of consistently averaging that return. Hopefully someone can find it and post.
     
  4. rousemark
    Online

    rousemark Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    13,029
    Likes Received:
    21
    State:
    Tennessee
    Same premium for both? Or, did you use "target" for the IUL?
     
  5. aus0417
    Offline

    aus0417 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    State:
    Alabama
    I used the same exact premium for both.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    I'm not sure exactly what you mean here...I used a 50/50 split on base/PUA on Guardian WL...can you do more than that?
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2012
  6. scagnt83
    Offline

    scagnt83 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,525
    Likes Received:
    27
    State:
    South Carolina

    Here you go.

    As I said earlier, 5.5% is 100%.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. VolAgent
    Online

    VolAgent Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    13,167
    Likes Received:
    13
    State:
    Tennessee
    Thanks. Still impressive. 92.3% chance of seeing 7%. Illustrate at 6% and you should be completely safe and still illustrate well.
     
  8. scagnt83
    Offline

    scagnt83 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,525
    Likes Received:
    27
    State:
    South Carolina

    Its hard to really answer those questions.

    Both have advantages and disadvantages.


    Given the exact same CV & assuming the exact same crediting rate & the same loan provisions; Distributions from the IUL (utilizing GPT) will outperform the WL which uses CVAT.


    That being said, LFG's loan provisions are much better than Guardians, its a lower fixed rate (5%) & its true NDR.

    LFGs IUL is a top notch product.
     
  9. dgoldenz
    Online

    dgoldenz Moderator Moderator

    Posts:
    4,149
    Likes Received:
    1
    State:
     
    What happens to that graphic if LNL or any other company lowers the cap rates? That's what I'd like to see...
     
  10. scagnt83
    Offline

    scagnt83 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,525
    Likes Received:
    27
    State:
    South Carolina

    I usually tell people to expect 6%-7% as a long term average and that they will not average above 8.5% on a long term basis.


    To me IUL is a way to be able to utilize GPT for distributions and not be locked into a low interest rate environment, and yes, its also a way to hopefully earn a bit more than a WL.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Common sense would dictate that it would fall to a degree.

    Caps can be raised or lowered, but very seldom are. IULs are much different internally for an insurance company than IAs are.

    Ever wonder why IUL caps are at 13% for Yearly P2P and IAs are at 2%?
    This is because the Company makes money from IAs through arbitrage, mainly on Treasuries.

    On IUL a direct portion of premiums received go towards policy expenses in addition to the GA & index options.
    In other words, the companies main source of revenue from IULs is policy expenses, not arbitrage.

    This is the reason the company can afford to give you 13% caps on IUL but only 2% on IAs. They arent trying to arbitrage the fixed holdings and therefore have a greater % to put towards the Indexed portion.



    Indexed product caps are at a historical low.
    IUL caps do have plenty of room to drop, but its unlikely it would be a significant drop.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2012

Share This Page