Lowest Whole Premium

[Allen Trent]

Yes, but you have to take into account price compared to DB.

Guardian is not just a $100k DB, in 30 years it will be a $150k DB or more. Which is extremely relevant when making this purchase.

My point is that its not an apples to apples comparison.

Exactly. The one I mentioned at $124 is considered participating, but it has almost no planned dividends on the base product design & likely will only be $105k-110k in 30 years unless PUAR used to overfund where the product design is built to look good with PUAR dividend scale & low load cost, etc

 

[scagnt83]

Exactly. The one I mentioned at $124 is considered participating, but it has almost no planned dividends on the base product design & likely will only be $105k-110k im 30 years

Same with Ameritas, they do pay a small dividend on that policy, but its a tiny DB increase. Maybe $115k or $120k after 30 years.

For the small price difference, its a major consideration imo.

$20 more per month for 50% more DB in 30 or 40 years.

Plus partial ROP via CV.

 

[WinoBlues]

Yeah but, Dividends are not guaranteed!

OK, let's look at the Guaranteed CV and Reduced Paid up at her retirement, 65 and 70.

Value v Price

 

[PrivClientSG]

I haven't read this entire thread -- however, I will say this to start -- first, when you ask what is the "lowest" premium, you are collapsing "price" and "cost," which are two different and distinct things. Second, you cannot look at premium as the "cost." It is the amount of the check you write, but that is not cost. There are numerous formulaic numbers you can look at that will speak to "cost." Thanks.

 

[jdeasy]

I haven't read this entire thread -- however, I will say this to start -- first, when you ask what is the "lowest" premium, you are collapsing "price" and "cost," which are two different and distinct things. Second, you cannot look at premium as the "cost." It is the amount of the check you write, but that is not cost. There are numerous formulaic numbers you can look at that will speak to "cost." Thanks.

The question was lowest premium.

 

[PrivClientSG]

The question was lowest premium.

I get it, and I am saying, in all likelihood -- unless there is some very unique issue -- it's a fallacious question.

 

[scagnt83]

Yeah but, Dividends are not guaranteed!

OK, let's look at the Guaranteed CV and Reduced Paid up at her retirement, 65 and 70.

Value v Price

Very true.

On the guaranteed column, Guardian is still going to come out ahead. Ameritas is a close second with guaranteed values. I cant speak for the others 100%, but both of those products blow away most SI style or non-par style policies.

 

[Allen Trent]

it's a fallacious question

I think that is somewhat of a delusive statement

 

[PrivClientSG]

Just curious what the lowest WL premium would be
for a 45 n/s standard on 100,000.

Which company has the lowest WL premiums in general.
Not considering dividends, etc.
Just moth premium.

Thanks
Shooter

Are you simply looking at writing the smallest check possible...or are you truly looking for the lowest cost possible? If the former, just curious? Excluding dividends however may cause one to think it might be the latter. Lowest cost can be quantified, analyzed, and rated several ways. Just curious, and as to the thinking. Thanks!

 

[WinoBlues]

Let's throw a little more sizzle on this thread.

Lowest premium in year one or say year 5 or 10? See - Div opt = reduce premium.
Lowest premium per thousand DB? See Div opt = PUA
Inherent benefits like ABR? Living benefits?