Friday, August 1, 2008

Insurers' Participating Fund Returns

I had just completed my compliation on the historical performance of the Life Participating Fund of our local Insurers. I had also complied the approximate weightings of their investment allocations. From my observation, asset allocation should be the main reason why the returns are so different.

* AsiaLife is the most consistent performer followed by Prudential and NTUC Income.
* Manulife returns are greatly enhanced by their 2006 performance.
* UOB Assurance performed the worst of all. From my understanding, much of their Life Participating fund are managed by UOB Asset Management. They assured that they will buck up this year.
* AIA are less bullish on the market. Their large bonds allocation may probably help them ride through the market downturn for 2008. Not surprising if they get best returns in 2008.
* No info on Aviva 2007 returns, hence cannot calculate the 3 years simple average.

Tips: Compare the Investment Rate of Returns used in the Benefit Illustration of the Insurers with this table. They may not be able to declare the bonus according to that returns if their participating funds performed below that rate regularly.


Anonymous said...

No point having higher return if the company refuses to declare higher bonus like NTUC...TraNSPARENCY IS BULLSHIT. If MAS dosen't do anyhting
and just accept the excuses of the insurers, like NTUC again, the consumers are helpless. Policyholders must take their own actions, like taking the insurance agents and the company to court.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, from the records NTUC Income made a double digit profit of more than ten percent. But they declare only 1.3 percent. That is only 12 percent of the profit? Where did the 88 percent go? Surely the chairs and renovation do not take up that much? Where and no need to account with NTUC ministers backing it up?

Anonymous said...

Quote for the day:

"A thick-skin person is one who can say he can lay a firm foundation with bricks that others throw at him or her."

A response to a motivational phrase in another IFA blog that does not permit posting.

Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...

the 1.3% is 1.3% of the Sum Assured. Its not 1.3% of the returns from the Life Participating Fund.

We won't know how much of the profit they really distribute and how much reserved for future smoothening.

You may notice that NTUC Income is not the best in term of Life Participating Fund returns. But did anyone heard of any insurers increasing bonuses over the past 1-2 years?

dsea said...

Hello Adrian

Alwasy enjoyed reading your posts.

One quick comment. Past returns are no indication of future returns.

Another BIG BIG problem is that fund managers move around. So, with change of new mgt team at ASIA life, I hope eveyting should still be alright.

I really do so as I just bought limited pay whole life for my kids.

Anonymous said...

do you have enough for yourself? Are you allocating your scarce resourses on the wrong person? Are you putting the cart in front of the horse?
It is sad day that people are still going for the limited whole life knowing that the protection is low, the return is low and the premium is high. Surely as a CPA you can make sense of all these.You can crunch the numbers. If you want to learn about financial planning go to www.fpas.

Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...

Those who visit Financial blogs are those who took the effort to do some research.

Quite a few of them who get to know me via this blog actually met me in my office and I only need to give them a few pointers to polish their financial plans.

Generally they did well and I believe dsea is one of them.

Unfortunately, many, who don't take such effort still thought everything is fine. All they remembered is that they had bought some policies before and paying for it every month.

Anonymous said...

one good thing about limited payment whole life on kids is that the kids would be covered for life, so that when the kids are independent, they wouldn''t have to pay for basic cover anymore. Policies' cash value would not be a consideration here.

The initial outlay may deter some peoplethough.

Anonymous said...

11.28, I think you are playing into the hand of unethical agents. What is whole life and what is limited payment. You got your financial planning misplaced. You don't need limited WL to insure your kid's risk. The money you spent on your kid could have gone to buy YOURS because your are the #1 important. If you die tommorrow your kid's insurance is USELESS. What is the probability of your kid having a CI? Yes there are cases but they fall into 1%. Whereas you, the probability is much higher and you need a lot, probably in the million. Do you have it so taht your kid and your family is protected.
It is really a waste of money

Anonymous said...

August 9, 2008 11:21 AM

What makes you think I don't have additional CI coverage when I have a child? If you're going to quote use a 1% likelihood to back up everything you say, then I'll say death cover is not important for anyone under 30 since the likelihood is 1% as well. Just go for a pure CI policy then.

The purpose of a limited payment whole life is to REDUCE the expenses that my child has to pay when he is financially independent. The last thing I want to leave my son with is a policy with that he has to pay for out of his own pocket for the rest of his life. It has got NOTHING to do with the poor returns nor are there any plans to cash out. It's future cashflow planning for my son, not for myself. I'm not interested in what you want to do with your son. I'll do whatever I want with mine.

If you are hell bent on arguing based on figures quoted from unknown sources, you might do better arguing on sgfunds. Big boasts about how BTITR is better than CPF SA or WL returns, how good they are at sticking to basic investment fundamentals.. At the end of the day still do market timing and write off previous losses. SHAMELESS.

Anonymous said...

It's plenty amusing that some people love to think that they can make do with lousy agents or go direct business for term insurance as they think themselves know best about claim procedures and don't need to depend on agents.

Hey, when your in a wheelchair and your family and you go see your MP because the claims officer decides to play punk, remember to video it and put on youtube. That'll be worth a laugh :)

Maybe you wont need to claim, your investments should be maknig 20% annualized returns hor. Can self-insure. Haha.

Ridiculous that some people think a CPA won't know about cashflow and figures. Maybe these know-it-all people can qualify for Advanced CPA, if there's even such a thing.

Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...

When I meet a client with a new member in the family. I try to put the priorities for the parent in the following order.

1) Medical Insurance for the child
2) Review Coverage for the parent
3) Some Critical Illnesses coverage for the child
4) Regular investments for Child Education

I think most people got it upside down.

Anonymous said...


Buying a limted payment whole life for a child is purely a luxury, and not a need. Under your order of recommendations, a LP WL would be step 5 or 6.

For the one who only argues based on costs and monetary figures, it's like comparng the prices of a China Snickers with an Australian one. They'll argue till their face turn green that the China one is better due to lower price, and keep insisting that they're right and smart even though the taste of both are not the same in the first place. Enjoy your Chinese Snickers. I prefer the Australian one. Thanks very much. I hope the additional 10c that you saved has generated a good enough return to compensate you for the foul taste.

Anonymous said...

August 9-8.53pm, I am not saying you can't do whatever you WANT. You said it ," I want..." and that makes you some rich fellow who have 'wants'. Only the rich have "wants". The needys have needs. My point is put the horse in front of the cart. There are so much to be addressed for yourself before it comes to your son. Have you done it?
Of course you have your own idea of financial planning and looking at it they are likely motivated by emotions than by your head. Insurance agents love people like you because you are the easiest people to sell wholelife or limited premium WL,with the "no need to pay for whole life" and "when you are old" approach.
Anyway, that is your bizness.

Anonymous said...

Mr. 9 aug.8.53pm, you said you are not interested in return why don't you buy a limited payment term plan? It is so MUCH cheaper than limited payment Whole life.You can even pay a single premium.
You also said you want cash flows for your son? Why not invest regularly and get better return and provide higher cashflow for your son?
BTITR, eh? what market timing?

Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...

Hey. Don't quarrel in my blog. Anything to say. Say it gracefully. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

There're many such "Robin Hoods" over at STOMP. They claim to expose the evil and inconsiderate deeds by Singaporeans, just like how the Robin Hoods here are exposing the ugly deeds of agents here.

Funny how cars can be smashed at Thomson during lunch peak hours and laptops stolen in full view of the lunch crowd without a STOMPer reporting it. Talk about exposing other people's bad deeds. Big problem come, Lobin Hood runs. Only dare to report people not giving up seat in MRT, dont dare to report robbery.

Anonymous said...

Quote for the day:

"A stalker is one that continues screaming at a person even though the other does not want to respond."

A response to a stalker.