Reforming Indexed Universal Life (IUL) Illustrations

Life insurance agents market Indexed Universal Life (IUL) in large part by illustrations showing cash value returns based on interest rate crediting assumptions. The default rate for running an IUL quote is set by the carrier, and that’s based on historical index averages. Long historical look backs, often 30 years, generate the highest interest rate assumptions. To give a quote, agents can assume a lower credit rate by plugging in a lower percentage on the software, but the carrier default rate shows highest cash value accumulation, so the assumed rate, likely between 7% and 8.25%, has the strongest incentive to be presented. Some major life insurance carriers want this practice reformed, concerned that their eventual inaccuracy of the cash value accumulation will give everyone in the life industry a bad name.

Is there cause for concern?  Yes.  Some carriers who object primarily market whole life products, so the criticism is self serving, but their concern is legitimate.

Index UL products credit rate assumptions are up there. The most common index used for IULs is the S & P 500, and the historical average hovers around an 8.00% rate of return.  The illustration runs a steady 8% crediting rate every year until age 120. For a 35 year old, that’s 85 years straight.  Projections have great cash value figures at age 65, and loans for retirement income age 65 to age 100.  Impressive, but unrealistic.

One carrier doing business in New York has modified their illustration to show alternate values more prominently.  It look something like this:

Guaranteed Values Non-Guaranteed Values
(alternate)
Non-Guaranteed Values
.
 2.00%             4.00%          8.00%

Nothing really new.  Illustration signature pages already have a midpoint assumption. This just runs the values all the way out on the subsequent charts. Still the IUL illustration shows S & P 500 Index annual point interest crediting each and every year even if an alternate cuts the assumed return in half. Interest crediting is subject to cap, now hovering around 13%, but may be reset lower the guaranteed cap is around 4% for many plans.  Indexed ULs have a the zero percent floor guarantee.  How often will the index hit the floor to effect the average?  Showing the same crediting rate every year is harder to justify in the distribution phase for retirement income loans. Compare a 30 year history, to a 15 year history and add up the zeros, by counting 0, 1, 2, 8, 11, as in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2008, 2011.

Here’s a better proposal from Fred Anderson, a life actuary from the Minnesota Department of Insurance.  (emphasis mine)

“Principles that should be included, Andersen said, are a national index of credit rates no more than 1¼ to 2¼ percent higher than traditional universal credit rates; prominent side-by-side mid-point comparisons; the relationship between policy loan rates and credit rates “that addresses a problem there.”

Doing a survey of ten large life company UL credit rates on December 8, 2014, they showed most current assumption UL now credit in the 3% to 4% range. A few were 4% to 5%.  Adding 1¼ to 2¼ percent would mean Index UL illustrations should assume credit rates of 4.25% to at the most 7.00%.  As it stands now, a consumer is more likely to be shown 8% each and every year. It wouldn’t be difficult for life companies to have illustrations with interest rate variations to match actual historical returns, so the client could review cash values that reflect the typical historical ups and downs of index returns. It’s already done on indexed annuities proposals.  John Hancock‘s Indexed UL illustrations already have this option.

Recommendation: Consumers should request Index UL illustrations with non guaranteed credit rates no higher than 5.00% to 5.50%.  A constant crediting rate is unrealistic; consider cash value projections for comparison purposes only.

Posted 12/12/2014.  Interest rates subject to change.

Mountain scene mist rising unknown artist

Cash value life insurance vs. term and invest the difference: is that the only choice?

Last week Seeking Alpha posted an article where a 38 year old man, presumably an investment broker, passed on his life insurance agent’s advice for a permanent life insurance product with a $5,000 annual premium, and instead choose term coverage for $600 a year. He took cash value life insurance to task with the self-serving advice to buying term and investing the difference.

OK.  No real argument there. At age 38, or for that matter for any working age person, term offers more bang for the buck, and that’s the most affordable way to replace lost income and thus protect a spouse or dependents.  But did this gentleman get enough coverage?

Term: How much and how long
He’s to spend $600 a year in premium.  Let’s review the most competitive rates and see what $600 a year buys.  A male preferred non-tobacco with SBLI (Savings Bank Life Insurance of Massachusetts), $800,000 of 20 year term is $596 a year. 25 year term $525,000 face amount is $600.75 a year with SBLI.  The rule of thumb is had 7 to 10 time one’s annual salary in life insurance. If he has children, there’s a college fund to consider.  Whether this individual got sufficient coverage depends on how much he makes, but keep in mind the goal is to get an adequate amount, and if affordable extend coverage to retirement age or to a point the children would be expected to have finished their secondary or post secondary education: age 22 or age 26.

Term and Permanent:  Two Plans – Two Purposes
Term verses permanent life insurance is a fallacious argument, as if it’s either one or the other. You can set up two policies: one term to replace lost income during your working years and a permanent for estate planning and to build cash value.  For this 38 year old, instead of a $800k 20 year term, how about a $100,000 of permanent life insurance and $700,000 in term?  A $100,000 Indexed Universal Life “Lincoln LifeReserve Indexed UL Accumulator” with Lincoln National, increasing face amount, targeted to endow at age 100, is $1,511 annual for male, age 38, preferred. That quote assumes 5% interest on S & P 500 index, annual point-to-point. At 5% that projects $33,803 cash surrender value and a $133,803 death benefit after 20 years.  Add a $700,000 20 year term with SBLI for $529 annual, that comes to $2,040 annual total cost for the two plans, and the Indexed UL is a very flexible premium, up or down depending on index returns or personal finances. This way after 20 years this person, now in his late 50’s, doesn’t have to encounter much more expensive choices in establishing permanent coverage for estate planning and with the right plan a chronic care or LTC rider in case LTC is needed.

There is also return of premium (ROP) term.  $800,000 20 year ROP term is $3,072 annual with American General for a 38 year old male at preferred.  In 20 years that guarantees $61,440 cash back or $170,218 in paid up life insurance.  After 20 years that paid up life insurance might be an appealing choice.  You could do a mix of ROP term and regular level term to lower that cost.

Please contact me for a free and confidential quote.  Many more options available.

sean's profile picLicensed Agent:  Sean Drummey
phone:  (910) 328-0447
email:    spdrummey@gmail.com

Trigger Method Fixed Indexed Universal Life (IUL) with Allianz

Henryk_Weyssenhoff_Spring_1911

Allianz recently announced enhancements to their Fixed Indexed Universal Life (IUL) product Life Pro+.  Why does Allianz call it fixed?  Well, that’s their terminology.  Known mostly as Indexed Universal Life (IUL) or sometimes as Equity Indexed UL (EIUL), the name may differ, but all these Indexed UL products have interest returns tied to a market index, most commonly the S & P 500 Index, and have a floor guarantee of at least 0% as downside protection against losses. That’s why Allianz presumably uses the word fixed as opposed to Variable UL which does not have a 0% floor.

One noteworthy feature in Allianz’s enhancements is a trigger method of interest crediting. If the S & P 500 Index annual point to point hits anywhere greater or equal to zero, will trigger 9% credited to the policy. This Trigger Interest Rate is subject to change on an annual basis but is guaranteed never to go below 2.50%. In years the S & P goes below zero, the floor crediting rate is 0%, and if the index measures in that annual point to point above 9%, the credit remains at 9%.

Most of the Indexed UL product caps are currently in the 11% to 13% range and in this strong market those higher caps make them a more alluring crediting strategy. Historical data does not show that 0% to 9% range to be as prevalent as 10% or higher. Allianz still offers the higher capped S& P 500 annual point-to-point option. Their trigger method is an added option in times when S & P 500 performance expectations were not very high.

Prudential to offer an Indexed Universal Life (IUL)

Prudential starting in May will offer their first Indexed Universal Life (IUL) called PruLife® Index Advantage UL.  The indexed account will be S&P 500® Index with annual point-to-point crediting.  That’s a very basic design and similar to another late entry to the Indexed UL market John Hancock. Prudential  intends to be competitive in premiums and cash value accumulation.  They are already very competitive in premiums for guaranteed universal life and survivor universal life.

It’s important to judge which Indexed Universal Life carrier is best for the long haul.  Prudential indicates they are more going for superior overall design rather than focusing on a high cap rate. The highest cap rate doesn’t necessarily mean the best performing product.  Cost of insurance and the internal rate of return are something to review even more closely.

Higher interest assumptions with Allianz and ING Indexed UL (IUL)

Looking closely over the last few days at the Allianz Indexed Uniersal Life (IUL) product “Allianz Life Pro+”  I was impressed by its cash value accumulation and for loans for tax free retirement income.  The index account loan rate of 5.30% is excellent.

But what interest rate should the illustration be shown?  Allianz “Blended Index II” can be illustrated at 8.78%. This percentage reflects a 25 year historical performance Dow Jones Industrial Average 35%, Barkleys Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index 35%, EURO STOXX 50® 20%, Russell 2000 ® 10%.  I’m sure agents go right ahead and use the highest allowed 8.78% on an illustration because it makes the non guaranteed assumptions look better.

But when comparing  Allianz 8.78% to Lincoln at 8.22% or for their S & P 500 point-to-point allowed illustrated rates, is that an fair comparison?    Lincoln recently announced that they too would follow a 30 year historical look back.  Given Allianz’s much higher assumption on their 25 year look back, their non guaranteed projections look better.  Carriers provide time frames on historical look backs partially based on what helps produce the highest number and to keep up with their competitor’s assumptions.  When comparing these three products, Allianz does have a different index, but is it superior?  Will any index with a 20% Euro stock element outperform the S & P 500?   The recent history of the European Union doesn’t make that a safe assumption.

ING‘s “Global IUL” can currently be illustrated at 10.00%.  It’s uses three indices: the S&P 500®, the EURO STOXX 50® and the Hang Seng.  The top performing index is weighted 75%, second best 25%, lowest 0% on a 5 year look back.  That 5 year look back has a powerful appeal: the two strongest are credited on past performance.  But really can one expect 10.00%?

Recommendation:  Request illustrations for each carrier at the same rate: 8%, 7%, 5% or lower for direct comparisons and to see how they may perform.

Indexed Universal Life (IUL): less blue sky projections

Indexed Universal Life (IUL) illustrations commonly show 7% to 8+% returns based on historical averages over the last 20 to 30 years. Whether or not an Indexed UL can capture that kind of performance over the coming decades is debatable. 2008 bore an unsettling resemblance to 1929, except officials were able to spread foam on the runway.  The Euro’s instability lead to an additional dose of foam for European banks late last year.  All this uncertainty can make Indexed ULs more attractive because guarantees eliminate downside market risk while providing a life insurance benefit.  But what about the upside Certainly 2011’s index results surveyed were below average.  Tops was the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 5.53%.  The S & P 500, the most widely used index, came in at 0%, which is the floor for an Indexed UL regardless.  But then again, seeing blue sky, 2012 is off to a good start, and historically that’s a very good sign.

When reviewing an Indexed UL, it’s prudent to scenario the possibility of lower returns.  I ran a series of comparisons last fall on overfunding an Indexed UL to build cash value for retirement income.  Lincoln performed very well compared to the competition.   I used the S & P 500 Index, annual point-to-point, and Lincoln assumed on the illustration an 8.45% average return.

Over 8%?  How about 5%?
What would returns look like projecting at a more pedestrian 5%?   Assume a male, age 44, excellent health, putting in $25,000 a year in premiums for 20 years with the goal tax-free distributions for retirement income at age 65. Initial death benefit $520,000.

Carrier S&P 500
Index
Return
Cash Value
Year 20,
Age 64
Death
Benefit
Year 20,
Age 64
Retirement Income
Yrs. 21-40
Ages 65-84
Cash Value
Year 41,
Age 85
Death Benefit
year 41,
Age 85
 ‘
Lincoln 8.45%  $1,077,926  $1,597,926  $146,326  $830,516  $1,120,514
5.00%     $727,834  $1,247,834    $51,396 $219,059     $317,285

Take a different example with less premium.  $10,000 premium a year for 20 years: male, age 47, excellent health. Initial death benefit $185,000.

Carrier S&P 500
Index
Return
Cash Value
Year 20,
Age 67
Death
Benefit
Year 20,
Age 67
Retirement Income
Yrs. 21-40,
Ages 68-87
Cash Value
Year 41
Age 88
Death Benefit
year 41,
Age 88
.
Lincoln 8.45% $424,913 $609,913 $46,590 $186,833 $252,943
.
5.00% $287,005 $472,005 $19,732 $62,067 $77,698

When shopping for an Indexed Universal Life
All Indexed UL proposals come with full illustrations.  They’re required.  Brochures are okay as a start, but zero in on the illustration’s chart.  An agent can easily generate and email them on .pdf format.   Illustrations are based on current assumptions, for example 8.45% for Lincoln, but can be run with interest rate assumptions anywhere from 0% up to current.  Make sure to request and review lower interest rate assumptions as a counterpoint.

Carrier: Lincoln National Life Insurance Company; Product: ” Lincoln LifeReserve Indexed UL  (2011)”
Quotes run 1/11/2012 and are subject to change.

For your own personalized free quote please contact me.

Sean Drummey
Phone: (910) 328-04447
email: spdrummey@gmail.com

Nationwide’s new Indexed Universal Life (IUL) compared to top Lincoln and Penn Mutual

Nationwide has a new IUL product called “Yourlife Indexed UL”.   I’ve posted a series of comparisons analyzing the top performers for tax deferred cash accumulation and tax-free retirement distributions, so I plugged in those assumptions to see how Nationwide compared.  Granted, it’s not a true apples-for-apples comparison.  The index selection for Lincoln and Penn Mutual is the S & P 500, 1 year point-to-point. Lincoln assumes a 8.45% hypothetical return and Penn Mutual a 8.41%.    Nationwide uses a weighted average multi-index  blended strategy, 1 year monthly average, assuming a 7.6% index crediting.

Only time will tell on upside assumptions.  While pondering the unknowns of the future, it’s good to remember the strength of indexed universal life is knowing there is a floor to stand upon.

Below are figures to the same benchmark structure: male, age 44, great health puts in $25,000 a year for 20 years, and at age 65 the takes out tax-free retirement income for the next 20 years in the form of policy loans, with enough left over for a death benefit.   $25,000 a year might be above what you’re considering, but showing high premium is like a drag race to see how fast the car will go, fast as in building cash value, and then popping the chute, projecting how the retirement distribution performance.

Carrier Cash Value
Year 20
Death Benefit
Year 20
Loan amount
Yrs  21 -40
Cash Value
Year 41
Death Benefit
Year  41
Lincoln  1,072,791  1,611,714  146,428  831,161  1,121,364
Penn Mutual  1,148,802  1,738,802  145,609  522,606     841,829
Nationwide     933,926  1,503,928  119,820   89,900     302,664

With the goal being maximum retirement income, knowing the carrier’s options and rules on policy loans is vitally important.   Nationwide has a fix loan option “declared rate loan”  that showed a $88,236 income distribution on the policy illustration.  For potentially better performance, like many other carriers Nationwide has a variable loan option “alternative loans” based on Moody’s Corporate Bond Yield Average, currently Nationwide illustrates at 4.79%, which gave a better $119,820 income distribution figure.  But what will that figure be in the future?  They have a guaranteed minimum of 3.00% and a guaranteed maximum rate of 8%.

Both Lincoln and Penn Mutual have fixed rate loan options that project better than the variables loan rates of the competition, including Nationwide.

Lincoln National Life Insurance Company:     “Lincoln LifeReserve Indexed UL  (2011)”
The Penn Insurance and Annuity Company:    “Accumulation Builder II IUL”
Nationwide Life and Annuity Insurance Company:  “Yourlife Indexed UL”.

Image Source: Wikemedia Commons

Disclaimer: Information and quotes are current and accurate to the best of my knowledge on December 4, 2011.  Product features and rates are subject to change.  Quotes are non-guaranteed projections based on current interest rates and cost of insurance. Tax information is general information only. Please seek professional tax advice for personal income tax questions and assistance.