The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing
|Subject: Re: Strategy comparison S&P500 vs. IUL [rev 1]||Date: 4/8/2013 6:37 PM|
|Author: aj485||Number: 71843 of 75335|
I don't have a "view;" I'm just not willing to make a decision based on religion.
Well, you don't seem to be making a decision based on data. At least none that you are willing to present so that others can poke holes in it. But you do seem very willing to poke holes in other people's analyses, even without providing any data to back up your view.....
I do, however, refute Rayvt's calculations as wildly optimistic on their face.
See, that's a view, that doesn't seem to be made based on data, since you are just stating your position, and not supplying any data to back up your position.
The historicals that you requested him to provide (and seem unable to calculate yourself) are what they are. And that shows that the caps and fees on the IUL limit it to starting the drawdown period at $2.85 million vs. the 'naked' S&P 500 position of $12.0 million.
None of the 'sophisticated Monte Carlo analysis' is going to change the historicals, only the drawdown forecast. And when you start the IUL drawdown forecast at less than 25% of the S&P drawdown forecast, effectively change the caps on the IUL drawdown amount to -5.3% to 6.7% (by imposing a 5.3% interest on the drawdown) and limit your drawdown to only $60k/year, even a Monte Carlo Analysis is going to have a hard time getting the IUL to come out ahead in the end.
Under the scenario you proposed, it's not the drawdown that is getting you, it's the limits on the build-up.
If you can't provide any data to refute the historicals that Ray provided, I will have to chalk your view up to your faith that limiting the risk on the downside will provide you with better returns in the end.
|Copyright 1996-2014 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|