Shion
Senior Mentor
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2008
- Messages
- 376,421
- Reaction score
- 122,481
PruWealth is endowment...hmm
PRUDENTIAL SAVINGS SAGA
- Thread starter akwl88
- Start date
PruWealth is endowment...hmm
My goal is actually to save a min of $1k every month. Now that i have some capital in bank, i was thinking of changing my saving in bank to investment.
Excluding Apr 2017, i had put in $14,250. Current value is $17,000. Profit is $2,750 which is 19% earned from $14,250.
That chart is for a minimum of $1,500/mth. Mine is just $750/mth which is the minimum of the whole plan. But i did receive Prudential bonus of $750 when signed up, just nice they had promo.
Investment link + protection meaning? Incluing insurance coverage?
But in a way, i can see it as myself being emotional and may do rash things, it is a disciplined way for myself to save. I know there is a risk of losing $$ as it is based on market. But if a pro like Mercer is handling as fund manager, should be better than myself which is a complete noob?
Yeah, i know Pruwealth is endowment. But im not sure if it is worth taking up another safety net. Already have 2 old plans as safety nets le. So i wanna put my $$ into investments and get better returns.
Excluding Apr 2017, i had put in $14,250. Current value is $17,000. Profit is $2,750 which is 19% earned from $14,250.
Are you sure it's a profit rather than the 1st yr bonus?
That chart is for a minimum of $1,500/mth. Mine is just $750/mth which is the minimum of the whole plan. But i did receive Prudential bonus of $750 when signed up, just nice they had promo.
Investment link + protection meaning? Incluing insurance coverage?
But in a way, i can see it as myself being emotional and may do rash things, it is a disciplined way for myself to save. I know there is a risk of losing $$ as it is based on market. But if a pro like Mercer is handling as fund manager, should be better than myself which is a complete noob?
Yeah, i know Pruwealth is endowment. But im not sure if it is worth taking up another safety net. Already have 2 old plans as safety nets le. So i wanna put my $$ into investments and get better returns.
Last edited:
Think you should diversify into DIY like posb invest saver (bond fund, sti etf) for your case. You already have existing endowments and an ilp from insurer, you need something that can give you liquidity, because your plans aren't liquid.
Of course this should be done after adequate hospitalization, accident, and death cover. I assume your agent has talked about those?
Of course this should be done after adequate hospitalization, accident, and death cover. I assume your agent has talked about those?
Yeah, my agent has talked about PA and hospital which im considering, at least for PA.
As for my SAF aviva, i noticed that the amount im paying has dropped from $38.40 which i upgraded a few months back till $13.37 recently. I believe coverage may drop back to $100k as well. Will take a review on it and see if if worth to change out to something else.
I may consider going for that POSB Invest Saver once i find a new job (in midst of it) and stabilize down. But for this plan, im buying stocks thru POSB in a way? Or will they give me recommendations? It looks similar to OCBC blue chip funds.
I can only take out $$ or profits after 2 yrs coz the 1st 2 yrs is locked in. Then again, i dun mind since such investments will take time to mature.
But wouldn't it be better if i leave it inside so that it would be used to further invest back into the pool of funds? Taking out and putting inside bank which gives 2% p.a is like fighting inflation only. Of coz positive side is that that profit wun be lost due to market volatility.
Once it reaches 2 yrs, i will have a discussion with my agent on the option of taking out $$. Although i dun foresee myself using that option unless really necessary.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
- Messages
- 84,162
- Reaction score
- 10,088
Oh, 1 year profit... Excellent wor. 2016 wasn't a good year in terms of stocks.
is the sign up bonus $750 included in your $2750 profit?
Which fund were you in?
Last edited:
The $750 bonus is inclusive. If exclude, it would be around 14.xx%. But that bonus was only introduced a few days after i signed up. My agent talked with management to include me inside the list, otherwise i wun get it.
Not a good year for stocks means the fund manager can buy at lower price, thus increasing my dollar averaging?
Below is the list of funds currently under Portfolio 19. % was determined by fund manager and i nvr touch it as it is risky for me.
AB FCP I - Global Value Portfolio Clss A SGD Hedge [1066] 15.00%
Aberdeen India Opportunities Fund [1003] 5.00%
Blackrock Global Funds - Asian Dragon Class A2 [1069] 15.00%
JPMorgan Funds - Emerging Markets LCY Debt Fund [1026] 15.00%
Schroder Emerging Markets Fund [1048] 15.00%
Schroder ISF China Opportunities [1050] 10.00%
Schroder Singapore Trust [1084] 25.00%
One of the funds was closed and replaced. I think its the 5th one.
windwaver
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2000
- Messages
- 34,559
- Reaction score
- 2,871
It's a stroke of luck that you managed to get that profit. Like what MikeDirnt78 has said, the long term 'profit' is not positive.
Most of the people that has made money from insurance are those who happen to buy into the market at the low end of the cycle. As time goes by, those returns get eroded (from high maintenance cost).
However, insurance should never be a profit making mechanism. As the words implies, it's meant for protection. Unfortunately, most agents sell the plans as money making to entice people to buy.
Do not be surprise couple of years down the road, your 'profits' evaporates or get reduced.
http://gotmoneygothoney.blogspot.sg/2017/04/dont-fall-for-this-insurance-agent-trick.html
good read for those that always kenna roadshows agents lol
good read for those that always kenna roadshows agents lol
Mecisteus
Great Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2002
- Messages
- 55,825
- Reaction score
- 12,257
You happen to make money because those funds have done well. But if you try to understand the structure and underlyings of what your investment is doing, you are actually paying layer and layer of fees.
I get what you meant. Maybe i shall monitor it after 2 yrs and see how it goes. If it starts to go south badly, i may withdrawn the profits.
Just curious, you mentioned insurance should never be a profit making mechanism. But this is a 100% investment with 0% into insurance. Unless you are referring to insurance companies selling investment portfolios?
*Disclaimer, I am no expert, just sharing my views, anyone can correct me if it's wrong. Please do so I can learn as well.
You register a profit because they give you that startup bonus at the start. However at the later years your fees will start to chalk up huge sums and Prudential will probably take more than half of your returns as fees. Of course it wont be a loss and you will still gain. However who says no to more money?
Just use a compound interest calculator and compound your total premiums paid as 4%/8%, and then u see your benefit illustration the 4% and 8% non guaranteed, huge difference. No doubt you will profit, but prudential themselves takes a lot back, just like other insurance companies. The effects of deductions is huge if you go back and check your BI.
I've been doing a lot of reading and calculations for Pulsar, and I think they have similar fee structure, will check when I am home!
Edit:
Fee structure
1) 4% of IA value, I won't comment on this cos I don't know how the distribution is to the IA. But 4% of $750 is $30 a month, annually I believe it adds up more.
2) .75 per annum on both IA and AA account values. So end of year 1 value is 9k total, charge you around $60+, sounds reasonable. But fast forward 20 years, they are charging $1350 that year, which is 2 months of your premiums. I can't do the accurate figure for an annual breakdown, but you get the idea. *This is with 0% returns, more charged as your account value earns more*
3) 12SGD per month = 144SGD a year = 2880 SGD by end of premium year. 4 months of your premiums.
The startup bonuses are given to you, but it will be taken back eventually by the fees, and they will dig into your returns as well. Don't get me wrong, there will be returns. But the fees you pay them, goes into the six figures as well thanks to compound interest.
By the way you cannot just surrender when it's making money, there's a early surrender penalty for different tier of premium years paid.
https://www.prudential.com.sg/expor...Vantage_Technical_Product_Booklet_english.pdf
I am not the expert here, I am very novice at this so my calculations may be wrong, but a novice like me personally takes what the experts here commented, did my own homework and made my own decision.
In the end it's up to myself to do the due diligence and not just ask the people here what I should do and follow. Because in the end if I lose money, can I blame the people here? No. I can only blame myself.
Last edited:
I don't know how much your income is but you are spending a lot of money on insurance and endowment and ILPs. Suggest you sit back, perhaps make a new thread and list down ur plans so the experts here can evaluate. Personally see no point in getting so many investment vehicles. Rather u put it into POSB Invest Saver. All these products lock you in for decades and liquidity is something I don't see you having.
Also, for the investment plan similar to pruvantage, if it is AXA Pulsar, I have some numbers to share which will shock you. I was also interested in this and many experts here pointed out the fallacies in the plan, I did my own calculations and they were right.
Last edited:
It mught be axa pulsar as he had mentioned its from axa. Will take note from another thread.
https://www.fool.sg/2017/04/17/dinosaur-fund-managers-will-eat-your-wealth/
Active fund managers once ruled the earth, but now they are heading for extinction. And the sooner most of them die out, the better.
Recently, I revealed that 98% of US fund managers trailed the benchmark S&P Global 1200 index over 10 years.
Even more shockingly, every single active emerging market fund failed to beat their benchmark. That’s right, every single one.
Asset managers are still kings of all they survey, charging hefty fees and enjoying lavish lifestyles at investors’ expense, but now their days are numbered. Evolution is finally catching up with them.
Mass extinction
Fund managers aren’t the large-brained, nimble-footed mammals that investors have been led to believe.
Quite the reverse: they are dinosaurs. And like the dinosaurs, they are heading for extinction.
New figures from S&P show that more than half of all equity funds have died out in the last 10 years.
Its SPIVA Europe Scorecard found that of the 535 UK equity funds that were active in 2006, only 46% were still alive last year.
Life expectancy is even shorter in Europe, with only 39% living for a decade, and 41% in the US. The death rate is brutal.
In fact, I’m being unfair to dinosaurs: they roamed the earth for 350 million years, equity funds are lucky to last a decade.
S&P says reason they are being culled due to “continued underperformance”. It’s that simple.
Dying out
Ironically, this high extinction rate makes active fund performance look better than it really is. When judging active fund performance, too many people only look at the survivors, the dead are conveniently forgotten, which distorts overall performance in their favour.
S&P’s figures do allow for this “survivorship bias”, and expose active funds as the cold-blooded, slow-brained plodders they truly are.
Mass extinction
The dwindling number of investment industry professionals who still defend active funds like to point to the winners, the small breed of managers who regularly do beat the market.
At the same time they conveniently ignore the far larger number of losers, those destined to die, unmourned, in the great investment fund graveyard.
However, the message is steadily getting through, which explains the dramatic surge in popularity of exchange traded funds (ETFs).
These low-cost trackers, which can be bought and sold like shares, can never beat the market but nor can they underperform either. They are killing off active fund managers in the same way the meteor strike did for the dinosaurs.
Take control
It also explains why more investors now choose to build their own portfolio of stocks and shares, and live or die by their own decisions, rather than pay a fund manager to do the work on their behalf (and almost certainly fail).
It pays to keep a closer eye on your investment decisions. The alternative is to watch your portfolio go the way of the dinosaurs.
Active fund managers once ruled the earth, but now they are heading for extinction. And the sooner most of them die out, the better.
Recently, I revealed that 98% of US fund managers trailed the benchmark S&P Global 1200 index over 10 years.
Even more shockingly, every single active emerging market fund failed to beat their benchmark. That’s right, every single one.
Asset managers are still kings of all they survey, charging hefty fees and enjoying lavish lifestyles at investors’ expense, but now their days are numbered. Evolution is finally catching up with them.
Mass extinction
Fund managers aren’t the large-brained, nimble-footed mammals that investors have been led to believe.
Quite the reverse: they are dinosaurs. And like the dinosaurs, they are heading for extinction.
New figures from S&P show that more than half of all equity funds have died out in the last 10 years.
Its SPIVA Europe Scorecard found that of the 535 UK equity funds that were active in 2006, only 46% were still alive last year.
Life expectancy is even shorter in Europe, with only 39% living for a decade, and 41% in the US. The death rate is brutal.
In fact, I’m being unfair to dinosaurs: they roamed the earth for 350 million years, equity funds are lucky to last a decade.
S&P says reason they are being culled due to “continued underperformance”. It’s that simple.
Dying out
Ironically, this high extinction rate makes active fund performance look better than it really is. When judging active fund performance, too many people only look at the survivors, the dead are conveniently forgotten, which distorts overall performance in their favour.
S&P’s figures do allow for this “survivorship bias”, and expose active funds as the cold-blooded, slow-brained plodders they truly are.
Mass extinction
The dwindling number of investment industry professionals who still defend active funds like to point to the winners, the small breed of managers who regularly do beat the market.
At the same time they conveniently ignore the far larger number of losers, those destined to die, unmourned, in the great investment fund graveyard.
However, the message is steadily getting through, which explains the dramatic surge in popularity of exchange traded funds (ETFs).
These low-cost trackers, which can be bought and sold like shares, can never beat the market but nor can they underperform either. They are killing off active fund managers in the same way the meteor strike did for the dinosaurs.
Take control
It also explains why more investors now choose to build their own portfolio of stocks and shares, and live or die by their own decisions, rather than pay a fund manager to do the work on their behalf (and almost certainly fail).
It pays to keep a closer eye on your investment decisions. The alternative is to watch your portfolio go the way of the dinosaurs.
It may or may not be, but Pulsar charges are very high. I've calculated it. Tell him to let you see the BI, because most of them don't unless you ask for it. See the effects of deduction column and you will know how much is deducted.
They might say you still make a profit, which is true, but then you realise, your acc value should be 500k when compounding, end up get 250k cos the other half goes to them, you wont like it either.
I've compounded for you 9000/year for 20 years for 8% returns. You are supposed to get 444,806.29. Ask your FA 8% returns after fees how much you will get back. the difference in these amount is how much you are paying them.
It's like I tell you I buy ur lunch for you but I eat half. You want meh?
Do dig up the old pulsar threads, many people have wrote about their views. The fee structure is complicated too.
Last edited:
https://www.prudential.com.sg/expor...Vantage_Technical_Product_Booklet_english.pdf
Based on the surrender charge table, if i surrender before 2 years, the surrender charge is 100%? Meaning i dun get back all of it?
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.
Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
