The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing
|Subject: Re: Hi gang... wow!!!||Date: 9/17/2013 1:12 PM|
|Author: aj485||Number: 72958 of 82859|
They do outperform a naked, risk-weighted S&P B&H strategy though.
Only based on risk and the adjustments as you have attempted to define them, without providing any data that can be analyzed to back up your theory. Yes, you provided a PDF, but didn't show the calculations or data to back up the assumptions that were made, nor can it be adjusted.
According to Ray's spreadsheet (which shows calculations and assumptions, and can be adjusted), even when you go 50/50 S&P 500/US Treasuries (thus 'reserving' 50% of the retirement funds), the IUL still loses to the S&P/Treasury strategy 91% of the time, and overall the S&P/Treasury strategy ends up with $1.023 million vs. $586k for the IUL strategy.
Based on Ray's numbers, I do not see how an IUL provides a better risk factored return.
|Copyright 1996-2017 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|