401K's

or Register to post new content in the forum

65 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Jun 11, 2007 4:25 pm

If you own underlying stocks etc, your looking at a total cost of 1%

1% every year, so by you mind numbing math, you are taking more of a commision than an annuity salesman in year eight!

Jun 11, 2007 8:04 pm

[quote=anonymous]

I happen to agree that 2.3% is expensive.  The more important point is whether it is worth paying the extra money.  This brings the discussion to investor returns vs. investment returns.  From what I've seen in my practice, the guarantees in the VA have a huge benefit when it comes to investor returns. Despite paying extra money, my VA clients do much better in VAs than they would in other investments.  This is why I have them in VAs in the first place.

For many other investors, the guarantees of the VA make no difference.  For these investors, VAs are not appropriate, thus we don't use VAs.

[/quote]

There is something we all agree on,

1) From the perspective of pure investment returns, the VA is going to greatly lag the underlying investments or a managed account, because of the much higher cost structure.

That's been the main point that I've been trying to make the whole time. And if clients need VA's for whatever reason, then various directly sold VA's (VG/Fidelity) are the way to go.

2) Some clients find value in the guarantees in excess of the economic cost of those guarantee's.


Jun 11, 2007 8:10 pm

[quote=AllREIT]

[quote=anonymous]

I happen to agree that 2.3% is expensive. The more important

point is whether it is worth paying the extra money. This brings

the discussion to investor returns vs. investment returns. From

what I’ve seen in my practice, the guarantees in the VA have a huge

benefit when it comes to investor returns. Despite paying extra money,

my VA clients do much better in VAs than they would in other

investments. This is why I have them in VAs in the first place.





For many other investors, the guarantees of the VA make no

difference. For these investors, VAs are not appropriate, thus we

don’t use VAs.

[/quote]



There is something we all agree on,



1) From the perspective of pure investment returns, the VA is going to

greatly lag the underlying investments or a managed account, because of

the much higher cost structure.



That’s been the main point that I’ve been trying to make the whole

time. And if clients need VA’s for whatever reason, then various

directly sold VA’s (VG/Fidelity) are the way to go.



2) Some clients find value in the guarantees in excess of the economic

cost of those guarantee’s.





[/quote]



No, that’s not something we all agree upon.
Jun 11, 2007 8:18 pm

I agree with Philo.

Jun 11, 2007 8:32 pm

[quote=AllREIT] [quote=anonymous]

I happen to agree that 2.3% is expensive.  The more important point is whether it is worth paying the extra money.  This brings the discussion to investor returns vs. investment returns.  From what I've seen in my practice, the guarantees in the VA have a huge benefit when it comes to investor returns. Despite paying extra money, my VA clients do much better in VAs than they would in other investments.  This is why I have them in VAs in the first place.

For many other investors, the guarantees of the VA make no difference.  For these investors, VAs are not appropriate, thus we don't use VAs.

[/quote]

There is something we all agree on,

1) From the perspective of pure investment returns, the VA is going to greatly lag the underlying investments or a managed account, because of the much higher cost structure.

That's been the main point that I've been trying to make the whole time. And if clients need VA's for whatever reason, then various directly sold VA's (VG/Fidelity) are the way to go.

2) Some clients find value in the guarantees in excess of the economic cost of those guarantee's.


[/quote]

AllREITARD, you are ignoring the performance "structure."