QUOTE(cherroy @ Apr 14 2016, 09:55 PM)
I urged one to read more about ILP to understand more clearly what is ILP.
With ILP, the total cost of ownership of insurance is also variable factor.
No one can conclude it is "cheaper" or not, mind that the investment part can yield you a loss, which eventually, make the ILP more "expensive" in total due to loss in investment.
There are pro and con with ILP or non-ILP, which depended on one preference.
we won't have a crystal ball to foretell what will happen with the future, if the customer would like to have a "certain" future, then traditional policies would suit them better as the returns are guaranteed albeit paying a higher premium.With ILP, the total cost of ownership of insurance is also variable factor.
No one can conclude it is "cheaper" or not, mind that the investment part can yield you a loss, which eventually, make the ILP more "expensive" in total due to loss in investment.
There are pro and con with ILP or non-ILP, which depended on one preference.
Bottom line is, you can't have the best of both world, with investment link, you can manage your risk, you can select funds that are generally secure and safe such as fixed income funds, bonds, etc. It wouldn't go towards the extreme unless the country goes bankrupt and Malaysia ends up like Zimbabwe. You'll probably be able to foretell that future by reading the news and then cash out to another country.
As what you've mentioned, it's depending on one's preference. We're just providing solutions suited to different individual with different preference.
This post has been edited by lifebalance: Apr 14 2016, 10:06 PM
Apr 14 2016, 10:02 PM

Quote
0.0843sec
0.51
7 queries
GZIP Disabled