Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Life
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-10-2017, 03:10 PM
elleminopee's Avatar
elleminopee elleminopee is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the project
Posts: 272
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr X View Post
Thanks. This makes a lot of sense. I did some quick calcs and noticed the cost goes negative after a certain number of years. Is this normal?
It probably means that the interest "credited" to you on your cash value/reserve is more than the cost (mortality and expense) of the insurance. So you are paying for the insurance by virtue on the interest earnings on prior deposits.
__________________
"A new tree had grown from the stump and its trunk had grown along the ground until it reached a place where there were no wash lines above it. Then it had started to grow towards the sky again. Annie, the fir tree, that the Nolans had cherished with waterings and manurings, had long since sickened and died. But this tree in the yard--this tree that men chopped down...this tree that they built a bonfire around, trying to burn up its stump--this tree had lived!" - Betty Smith, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-11-2017, 11:58 AM
Mr X Mr X is offline
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elleminopee View Post
A concept that is used in a sales setting is to calculate "death benefit IRR". Count each of your premiums as a negative (the investment) and the death benefit as a positive at the end of the stream. Do this for each duration (i.e. calc the DB-IRR assuming you die at the end of year 1, 2, 3, etc). The numbers will start out insanely high, but eventually fall to something that looks pretty normal. The idea is to figure out how long you would have to live before the return was unattractive. You'll have to figure out unattractive vs. what (30-yr bold yield, avg stock market yield, etc).

This is a way to compare the return in your policy vs some other financial instrument, so it a cumulative view expressed in terms of return not $ cost. Just remember the returns for the high death ages don't really reflect the fact that even though you didn't die young, you had protection in case you did.

I personally don't see much value in calculating the cost year by year and think you should take a long term view.

You can also calculate a cash value-IRR (same concept as above but assume you surrender at the end of each duration instead of die). These numbers will be considerably less attractive. They'll start really low and grow toward a reasonable (but still low) rate of return.
Thanks.

Yeah, I get that IRR on the death benefit and cash values tells me the returns for those.

With that said, I am interested in the costs because it's a way to see what the insurance costs. I mean no one says "don't worry about it" or "it's not important" when buying term insurance or universal life. People look at both cost and return to get a complete picture of what they're buying.

That's what I want.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-11-2017, 12:28 PM
MathGeek92 MathGeek92 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 675
Default

A "cost" from the policyholder perspective is very difficult to describe (IMO).

Lets say a company invests in 50% equities (assume 8% return) and 50% 30 year bonds (assume 5% return). The "total" return earned by the company is 6.5%.

lets say you get a net growth rate of 4% determined by (gain in CSV) / (BOY CSV + Prem)

gain in CSv = EOY CSV - BOY CSV - Prem paid

Would you say you had a 2.5% cost?

that margin of 2.5% is the value translated into a rate for your perspective. What if it was made up like the following:

-3.5% gross interest company margin
+$5/100 mortality dividend component
+0.5% interest dividend component
-$75/policy dividend expense


lets say that all nets to 2.5%

How would you translate that cost?

That's kind of the beauty and the pitfalls of WL insurance. the "cash" return is simply the increase in CSV (with dividends paid) - less the premium paid / BOY CSV

The complexity is the insurance costs are all embedded inside that net build up. Your base CSv is guaranteed no matter what. Dividends fluctuate based upon company experience.


Now - in full disclosure - I am not a big fan of permanent insurance. You can never afford enough of it ata young age when you need the most, and if you do buy it, you have way too much insurance at older ages when you really need a lot less.

There are some tax plays, but for the average person, they are much better off buying term and investing more in a ROTH or using tax sheltered strategies. If you ever become "uninsurable" during the term period, simply convert to a permanent at that time. Buy/renew/review your term coverage every 5 to 7 years and adjust as necessary.

Plus if you buy enough of it, you basically get a medical exam for free. If you qualify for super duper term rates, then you know you are pretty healthy. plus it may be motivation for some to maintain a slightly healthy lifestyle knowing you need to keep your weight under control, etc.

As with all free advice you get what you pay for. I'd suggest a thorough financial review and determine why you bought WL in the first place and does it still fit in your financial goals, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-11-2017, 12:33 PM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 36,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek92 View Post
Now - in full disclosure - I am not a big fan of permanent insurance. You can never afford enough of it ata young age when you need the most, and if you do buy it, you have way too much insurance at older ages when you really need a lot less.
A company I once worked for, in the days before UL, offered a plan that had level premiums and a death benefit that declined. I'm not sure of the exact pattern - say the face amount reduced 50% 10 years after issue and a further 50% at age 65. (Not sold to people over 55 . . .)

Quote:
There are some tax plays, but for the average person, they are much better off buying term and investing more in a ROTH or using tax sheltered strategies. If you ever become "uninsurable" during the term period, simply convert to a permanent at that time. Buy/renew/review your term coverage every 5 to 7 years and adjust as necessary.

Plus if you buy enough of it, you basically get a medical exam for free. If you qualify for super duper term rates, then you know you are pretty healthy. plus it may be motivation for some to maintain a slightly healthy lifestyle knowing you need to keep your weight under control, etc.

As with all free advice you get what you pay for. I'd suggest a thorough financial review and determine why you bought WL in the first place and does it still fit in your financial goals, etc.
Interesting comments, especially the last paragraph.
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Aug 15, 2017.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
MORE:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow View Post
Complementing your technical skills with social skills - whatever they are - will help your career. This is not a sign that the world is unjust.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bro View Post
I recommend you get perspective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enough Exams Already View Post
Dude, you can't fail a personality test. It just isn't that kind of test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locrian View Post
I'm disappointed I don't get to do both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeppermintPatty View Post
It's SO much better to work for a good manager.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patience View Post
slow down
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-11-2017, 04:12 PM
Mr X Mr X is offline
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek92 View Post
A "cost" from the policyholder perspective is very difficult to describe (IMO).

Lets say a company invests in 50% equities (assume 8% return) and 50% 30 year bonds (assume 5% return). The "total" return earned by the company is 6.5%.

lets say you get a net growth rate of 4% determined by (gain in CSV) / (BOY CSV + Prem)

gain in CSv = EOY CSV - BOY CSV - Prem paid

Would you say you had a 2.5% cost?

that margin of 2.5% is the value translated into a rate for your perspective. What if it was made up like the following:

-3.5% gross interest company margin
+$5/100 mortality dividend component
+0.5% interest dividend component
-$75/policy dividend expense


lets say that all nets to 2.5%

How would you translate that cost?

That's kind of the beauty and the pitfalls of WL insurance. the "cash" return is simply the increase in CSV (with dividends paid) - less the premium paid / BOY CSV

The complexity is the insurance costs are all embedded inside that net build up. Your base CSv is guaranteed no matter what. Dividends fluctuate based upon company experience.


Now - in full disclosure - I am not a big fan of permanent insurance. You can never afford enough of it ata young age when you need the most, and if you do buy it, you have way too much insurance at older ages when you really need a lot less.

There are some tax plays, but for the average person, they are much better off buying term and investing more in a ROTH or using tax sheltered strategies. If you ever become "uninsurable" during the term period, simply convert to a permanent at that time. Buy/renew/review your term coverage every 5 to 7 years and adjust as necessary.

Plus if you buy enough of it, you basically get a medical exam for free. If you qualify for super duper term rates, then you know you are pretty healthy. plus it may be motivation for some to maintain a slightly healthy lifestyle knowing you need to keep your weight under control, etc.

As with all free advice you get what you pay for. I'd suggest a thorough financial review and determine why you bought WL in the first place and does it still fit in your financial goals, etc.


Appreciate the perspective. This is my question. What is that 2.5% of? Premium? Cash value? Something else? Or is there a better way to tease out those implied term costs inside of a whole life policy?

As far as no need for permanent insurance, that's probably more a philosophical one than a financial or mathematical one. It's just as easy to say no one really *needs* insurance at all, term or otherwise. We buy it because we want to protect something.

Not worried about being "overinsured." I plan on drawing down the CV in retirement which should decrease my death benefit, solving any perceived "over insurance" issue. And if it doesn't happen, my wife and kids will be very comfortable. I was actually able to buy enough whole life to insure myself properly for my age/income.

I did look at whole life vs buy term and invest the difference. Except I started with whole life, figuring out how much insurance I would need and then looked into getting the same DB as the whole life and investing the difference. At the end of the day, whole life made a lot of sense to me, even based on more conservative dividends.

Most of my friends (and my parents) bought term and squandered the difference or lost it in the stock market, with one of my parents losing their savings twice over. So I didn't want to go down that road.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 1.18911 seconds with 11 queries