No, it's not necessarily better.
You pay for the UT, and what is the IRR of the investment linked UT compared to if you can buy any UT that is not provided by insurance company?

I'm a prudential client; and I can tell you the Inv linked funds performance is no where near what Eastspring investment (pure UT arm) funds are doing

If I can turn back time and choose my insurance plan again, I would check the linked fund returns on top of considering the coverage and benefits

The clause referred to is cancelling the entire class of policies. Whilst it can be done, it's quite a drastic move. They won't do it if they don't want to pay 1 particular case or even 10 cases. It has to be ALL of the policies within that portfolio
But yes, it's in virtually all life policies

Investment Linked policies basically means you pay same amount of money throughout the policy tenure, but in the beginning insurance charge is lower and therefore the differential is invested into funds that supposedly help grow the cash value so that when you are older it will subsidise the higher insurance charge. So the rate of returns from the funds is crucial to determine whether or not you need to top up premium to keep your policy in force

The prulink equity fund return for last 1 year is -3.18% and cumulative 5 years is 22.89%

Compare this with

Eastspring Investment Equity Income fund last 1 year is 1.27% and cumulative 5 years is 73.66%

Compared this with

AIA EQUITY DIVIDEND FUND last 1 year is 1.47% and 3 years annualised is 8.73%

Hence why I say to compare investment linked fund returns before signing up an investment linked policy
Disclaimer: I don't own AIA policy and do not sell as well.

Sure
https://www.aia.com.my/content/dam/my/en/do...02_FFS_EDFA.pdf

They don't show 5 years data

Actually, prulink equity shows 3 years data
https://www2.prudential.com.my/export/sites...kequityfund.pdf

3 years cumulative 8.62% vs AIA 8.73% annualised returns (that 26.19% without considering compounding effect!)

Please read properly
What was presented in Prulink fact sheet is cumulative 8.62%, that works out to be 2.87% annualised; compared to AIA 8.73% annualised

Cumulative apple-to-apple comparison would be Prulink 8.62% vs AIA 26.19%

How la you want people to buy insurance from you

Good to hear that you are not.... I'm a lot less worried for the consumers out there already

EI small cap invest in different type of shares and hence I've not used it as a comparison to the investment linked funds. The returns are attractive, but its volatility is also very high. Definitely not the kind of funds to dump 100% of your capital into

Anyway, this is seriously OT. Please proceed to fund related threads for in-depth discussion

I think the best way to compare, is to compare the indicative insurance charge that is provided in both uforlife and ILP quotation. and I've done it for prudential and allianz, it's somewhat similar, not significantly cheaper or more expensive.

The investment returns to pay off future higher cost simply mean you pay more in the beginning so that the investment can grow. But if I set the same amount aside when I buy uforlife and invest it myself, I would not be confined to the limited investment linked funds offered by the insurer my policy is with

Honestly, if I were to do it again, that's how I would do it *disgrunted prulink client*

Watami card has been discontinued from this month 😢

Since Aeon Watami 3% has since discontinued, according to genxyz sifu, the best cash back card for insurance would be Alliance Bank Younique - for spending at RM3,000, the effective cash back rate is 1.67%; about half of Watami but still better than all those <1% cash back for insurance spending

It goes to show I spend way too much on categories with no extra cashback - insurance, touch n go, retail spending like clothes and all

for petrol, utilities, online spending, grocery, dining and all we use those with higher cashback rate

In the past I've raised the importance of considering the investment linked fund returns when selecting insurance company for investment linked policies and it usually get shot down with the standard 'don't mix protection with investment' bla bla. But the investment linked funds will help you grow the capital to sustain the higher insurance cost later on and therefore is an important consideration.

In the past there's no easy way to compare returns of these investment linked funds. Today someone sent me this website that has the info so I'm sharing this with you guys



So clearly not all funds do well and if you are with the lower returns one, you may end up with less cash value, or worse, running out of cash value later on and have to increase premium to maintain the policy

Credits: http://iportfolio.com.my/compare

Confused, are you asking about investment linked funds or UTs? UTs we continue in FSM thread la

For investment linked funds, u refer to chart lor. I sked later the agents from the worst performance company come after me