AXA or TM LifeFlex?

[Rilapuma]

Was quoted for AXA Life Essential Prime

$1873 for 15yrs (35k Sum assured with 3.5X Multiplier). Covers Early CI up to 75K. I was wondering if TM LifeFlex could offer a more comprehensive coverage for the same premiums and duration?

and surrender value

Any agents can quote me before i decide on this plan

 

[limster]

I don't like this sort of 15-year limited pay policies. You are paying a lot up front and therefore you are basically locked in.

One also assumes that after 15 years, you should be able to be in some management position with a higher salary, so why not carry on paying premiums, and in return, premiums are lower than limited pay? Or alternatively, inflation results in everyone having higher 'paper salary' and chicken rice costs $10.

Furthermore what you get in the future in return may be totally eroded by inflation or depreciation of the S$.

A traditional whole life policy that breaks even by year 7-8 or breaks even by year 10 (with CI rider included) is better because it gives you options - whether to continue, or to take back the premiums for something else.

 

[Rilapuma]

I don't like this sort of 15-year limited pay policies. You are paying a lot up front and therefore you are basically locked in.

One also assumes that after 15 years, you should be able to be in some management position with a higher salary, so why not carry on paying premiums, and in return, premiums are lower than limited pay? Or alternatively, inflation results in everyone having higher 'paper salary' and chicken rice costs $10.

Furthermore what you get in the future in return may be totally eroded by inflation or depreciation of the S$.

A traditional whole life policy that breaks even by year 7-8 or breaks even by year 10 (with CI rider included) is better because it gives you options - whether to continue, or to take back the premiums for something else.

Currently is there any of such plans that break even in 10yrs? I didnt know of this option. That would be far better

 

[NiteX2]

Currently is there any of such plans that break even in 10yrs? I didnt know of this option. That would be far better

Nope, that only exists at least a good 7-8 years back or even longer. Today's interest rate environment is so low that its not possible for policies to be like that of yesteryears where high yields are projected and able to be met

Regarding your question on AXA vs TM, it depends on what your requirements are, for AXA the multiplier is fixed at 3.5x whereas for TM it ranges from 1x all the way to 10x. The premiums will vary as well of course.

 

[MaoZeDuo]

Tokyomarine used to be imba with the life time multiplier and early CI

 

[limster]

Currently is there any of such plans that break even in 10yrs? I didnt know of this option. That would be far better

As mentioned, my NTUC whole life policy is from last time when interest rates were higher. But maybe you can get a quote from NTUC as well to see what their projected break even is.

I also don't understand early CI, it just means you are pay more just to claim a little earlier. Surely you have hospitalisation insurance to cover the early part of the CI?

 

[MaoZeDuo]

I also don't understand early CI, it just means you are pay more just to claim a little earlier. Surely you have hospitalisation insurance to cover the early part of the CI?

U already understood it. It could be a "want" instead of a "need".

 

[Rilapuma]

As mentioned, my NTUC whole life policy is from last time when interest rates were higher. But maybe you can get a quote from NTUC as well to see what their projected break even is.

I also don't understand early CI, it just means you are pay more just to claim a little earlier. Surely you have hospitalisation insurance to cover the early part of the CI?

U already understood it. It could be a "want" instead of a "need".

I feel it is an added protection that is necessary With medical advancement, it would mean earlier detection of the disease, which may not require hospitalisation.

Nope, that only exists at least a good 7-8 years back or even longer. Today's interest rate environment is so low that its not possible for policies to be like that of yesteryears where high yields are projected and able to be met

Regarding your question on AXA vs TM, it depends on what your requirements are, for AXA the multiplier is fixed at 3.5x whereas for TM it ranges from 1x all the way to 10x. The premiums will vary as well of course.

Yes that is what i understand from TM new plan (abt the multiplier). With the premium of $1800/yr, i was wondering if TM could provide similar if not better coverage for both early and later stages of life (ie.after multiplier ends) for early CI. I already have a 200k life plan covering late stages

 

[NiteX2]

I feel it is an added protection that is necessary With medical advancement, it would mean earlier detection of the disease, which may not require hospitalisation.




Yes that is what i understand from TM new plan (abt the multiplier). With the premium of $1800/yr, i was wondering if TM could provide similar if not better coverage for both early and later stages of life (ie.after multiplier ends) for early CI. I already have a 200k life plan covering late stages

Do find below quotes for your reference.

35k Sum assured (with 3.5x multiplier) for 15 years payment - $2336.05/yr

As you can see, the difference is quite big between the 2 plans.

Key points to note though:
TM pays out up to 150k for early stage CI, AXA pays out up to 75k per early stage CI

TM multiplier lasts till age 65 while AXA's multiplier lasts till age 70

TM provides $100 wellness benefit every 2 years and 1% of base sum assured ($350 in this case) every year starting age 65 whereas AXA doesn't have both features.

Just FYI in case you are considering 150k coverage from TM:

30k Sum assured (with 5x multiplier) for 15 years payment - $2563.40/yr

Oh, premiums will be slightly cheaper per year if we do a backdating to let the plan start 1 day before your birthday

 

[limster]

I feel it is an added protection that is necessary With medical advancement, it would mean earlier detection of the disease, which may not require hospitalisation.

Insurance is for catastrophic events.

If the disease is not serious enough for hospitalisation, then it is far more cost effective to self-insure.

This is a sometimes a difficult concept to understand, which is why some agents can get away with convincing the client to take up various unnecessary riders whose main purpose is to increase the agent's commission.

 

[MaoZeDuo]

I feel it is an added protection that is necessary With medical advancement, it would mean earlier detection of the disease, which may not require hospitalisation.

valid