I see. I'm just trying to understand from the other perspective.

What's so bad about having a policy with some account value, savings?
Especially investment-linked policies taking a lot of... dare I say "unwarranted" shade from this forum.
It does feel that way.


Why leh?
Genuinely I just feel it's just a product that serves a need.
Then there are other products that serve different needs.
So I just wish to hear from seasoned people like yourself and other very experienced seniors here.

Sincerely nak minta tunjuk ajar

Go see the news. All the people medical insurance hike is because they all of them buy ILP. Pay a lot suppose to keep your premium stable but that is not the case in reality.

It's nothing bad. It's just that, it's more expensive. Most people when they think "insurance" actually just want protection, but they get sold policies with some savings/maturity element that actually 2x-3x the cost, or more.

Just bot last month, don't know good or not, but price seem cheap compared to my current policy ..
Need to wait for 120 days in order to get the full coverage.

Yeah totally understand that the "training" provided by some insurance companies are heading in this direction.
Products being sold as a "package" without adequate considerations.

However, on a COI perspective, it is actually less though (looking from this side of the fence).
Of course, we're looking at whole life products as opposed to Term.

Yes, while Whole Life products has its benefits, it commands a higher ticket upfront.
Term Life products while it has a lower entry barrier, it opens up the insured to be underwritten at every interval.
Of course, if money is no issue, who would want to be re-evaluated again and again lah kan?
But money is an issue lah. So we want to get the best out of our money.

I get it. We want what we want, and we would like the decision for the "frills" to be ours to make as consumers rather than having the heavy mumbo jumbos... in a way forced unto us for not knowing better.

I guess I do have to note that whatever mentioned above is strictly non-medical insurance products in nature.

This post has been edited by JIUHWEI: Sep 18 2025, 01:37 PM

wah... so cheap ar... a pure life insurance without surrender value is only Rm 100 pm?
then the 900rm per mth (10.8K pm) can be thrown into EPF and get 6% pa....

if 6% pa return, portfolio after
10 years: 165K
20 years: 440K
30 years: 0.93 million
40 years: 1.80 million


Isn't this better? or insurance take too much?



even if the return is only 2.5% pa, portfolio after
10 years: 135K
20 years: 295K
30 years: 0.5 million
40 years: 0.75 million


????? insurance firm taking too much?

It's not about insurance firm taking too much. After all the savings and maturity element is priced in. You also pay for the guatanteed returns. (Note: Although, yes, of course, insurers get higher profit margins from savings plan compared to pure protection products. )

Anyways, this is a Kaotim quote for 36y/o female with RM1mil covering death TPD. No surrender value at all and level premium throughout. 30y level premiums



This post has been edited by contestchris: Sep 18 2025, 02:59 PM

I eventually bought it too (both medikad and legasi). Same same now waiting for cooling period to be over before I surrender my ILP

well, the 2.5% return is guaranteed by EPF and gov of Malaysia, and still provide better value.

Plus the 100rm pure life insurance, the combo is basically the same profile as what's offered by the insurance.

unless i am missing some other hidden benefit.

But the Kaotim quote goes till 66 only thats y its so cheap right? Unlikely to have payout and with no cash value.

As I too bought tis, let me reason out and limit and non cash value.
It's a pure protection product, no savings or investment in it.
It's a protection for the surviving dependants in case something happened to the insured.
Thus, normally no need to protect after certain age when no longer salaried, kids have grown up, all loan have already paid up, no more commitments. At that point it's just a waste.

With coverage just till 66 yrs old, .... can it be used in place of mlta / mrta for housing loan that ends at 70 yrs old ?

Added, ...
If one had been paying let's say RM3k pa for life insurance that covers assuming 1 million till 66 yrs old.
With life expectancy of 85/90, that is 20/25 yrs more.
3k X 20/25 yrs = RM60/75k payment
With this 60/75k investment that can reaps 1 million to be passed on as legacy, .....is it worthwhile to get one that covers till 85/90 instead of 66 as the chances of payout at 66 is much lesser than 85/90?

I think it is still worth it even if it costed another 100k investment.

This post has been edited by MUM: Sep 20 2025, 09:25 PM

hi, anyone here have receive the offer for Allianz GIO? Mind to share more? My old plan UMSIR and the new policy offer under Assurelink with somesort of NCD mechanism

Hello all,

does Prudential Malaysia have apps ? I tried download myPrudential but seems like for Hong Kong

According to this, previously have but discontinued in Nov24.

https://www.prudential.com.my/en/our-compan...prudential-app/

Don't think u can find 3k pa life for 1mil until 85/90yrs old. The insurance company for sure will lose. Even for example 5k pa for 100 years is 500k, but they surely need pay out 1mil. For each cust they will lose 0.5mil.

If you do the maths as per post 7406, ...
I think they will make more profits with your yearly premium than the accumulated amount of premium collected over the years.

Ex. In post 7407...
1800 pa X 30 yrs = 54000
If die before 30 yrs gets 1 million

So I guess the best strategy is Buy Term (minimal) and Invest the Difference (BTID) right?

Yes, if compared to ilp plans, but ilp has its benefits too.
Some liked ilp too

What you're conveniently missing out on is, the insurance company will invest most of the premiums in the initial years into assets that yield 5% returns (or more). So by the time you're dead at 100 years old, the insurance company has made significant profit even if they pay out more than your total premium paid.