WL Vs GUL

[charleszubrod]

What are the arguments which makes on form of the above Life insurance better than the other? In advance, thank you.

 

[Newby]

What are the arguments which makes on form of the above Life insurance better than the other? In advance, thank you.

WL better for cash accumulation and benefits while living.

GUL better for max death benefit per premium.

 

[pfg1]

IMO, those aren't really comparable products. Like Newby said....one is a cash value product, the other a death benefit product. Both have their place.

 

[WinoBlues]

As Newby and pfg1 said two different products. Both can be built to have cash values and both can be built to have higher death benefits in later years. No always best.

 

[DHK]

Generally speaking, whole life will work best when it's issued to a younger person.

GUL is typically for those who wish they bought whole life when they were younger.

 

[TwiLight]

I like the comparison of WL vs Term. A GUL is basically a non cash value product a level DB to 121.

Some companies like Transamerica sell a GUL that has a return of premium. They have a 33% of face max or ROP in year 15, 20 and 25+.

 

[xrac]

Generally speaking, whole life will work best when it's issued to a younger person.

GUL is typically for those who wish they bought whole life when they were younger.

This is how I look at it.

 

[AnonymousOne]

I like the comparison of WL vs Term. A GUL is basically a non cash value product a level DB to 121.

Some companies like Transamerica sell a GUL that has a return of premium. They have a 33% of face max or ROP in year 15, 20 and 25+.

Lesser of 33% of face or rop, doesn't look as good for older folks