blurpandasg2014
Master Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2014
- Messages
- 2,676
- Reaction score
- 415
Updated. +10char
That's becoz the funds these old plans invested in experienced exponential growth in the 90s till mid 00s along with the rise of the global economy what. The funds new plans invest in are younger and we are talking about a much more mature economy with significantly slower growth. That's why I find it not meaningful to compare very old plans against much newer ones.Just curious I have an old Income endowment plan (bought in 1993) and I compare to the recent Income endowment plan I have and not sure upon maturity do they refer to same thing.
Old plan. It determine maturity as below
Basic - refer to sum assured and this is guaranteed
Bonus - non-guaranteed and I assume this is the yearly Reversionary Bonus
Spec Bonus - non-guaranteed and I assume this is the Terminal bonus
New plan. It determine maturity as below
Maturity which is NOT sum assured. It is based on total premiums paid PLUS extra and this is guaranteed
Reversionary Bonus non-guaranteed
Terminal bonus non-guaranteed
It seem old plan upon maturity are so much better as it is based on sum assured and not total premiums paid.
Ok noted so a more meaningful comparison would be different insurers old plan (one group) and then different insurers new plan (one group) total two groups.That's becoz the funds these old plans invested in experienced exponential growth in the 90s till mid 00s along with the rise of the global economy what. The funds new plans invest in are younger and we are talking about a much more mature economy with significantly slower growth. That's why I find it not meaningful to compare very old plans against much newer ones.
Yes, or you can compare old against new to see longitudinal changes in return differences.Ok noted so a more meaningful comparison would be different insurers old plan (one group) and then different insurers new plan (one group) total two groups.
I already compared the old plan maturity guaranteed vs new plan maturity guaranteed and old plan wins but you say not apple to apple comparison. As for RB old plan is giving me 1.5% annually but new plan 0.70%. Again old plan wins. So think need to have same group to be fair comparison.Yes, or you can compare old against new to see longitudinal changes in return differences.
I said not to compare which is better. You still use the data to demonstrate the magnitude of the decline. That's what I meant by longitudinal tracking.I already compared the old plan maturity guaranteed vs new plan maturity guaranteed and old plan wins but you say not apple to apple comparison. As for RB old plan is giving me 1.5% annually but new plan 0.70%. Again old plan wins. So think need to have same group to be fair comparison.
The sum assured shown in new plan are solely for determination/computation of RB and TB.Just curious I have an old Income endowment plan (bought in 1993) and I compare to the recent Income endowment plan I have and not sure upon maturity do they refer to same thing.
Old plan. It determine maturity as below
Basic - refer to sum assured and this is guaranteed
Bonus - non-guaranteed and I assume this is the yearly Reversionary Bonus
Spec Bonus - non-guaranteed and I assume this is the Terminal bonus
New plan. It determine maturity as below
Maturity which is NOT sum assured. It is based on total premiums paid PLUS extra and this is guaranteed
Reversionary Bonus non-guaranteed
Terminal bonus non-guaranteed
It seem old plan upon maturity are so much better as it is based on sum assured and not total premiums paid.