The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing
|Subject: Re: Lifetime Annuity||Date: 10/4/2013 3:44 PM|
|Author: Rayvt||Number: 73425 of 75339|
Office of the Inspector General (I believe it is) controls the language and claims in insurance company marketing materials, contracts and illustrations.
Sure, they put the disclaimers right out in the open, but it's up to the mark ^h^h^h^h buyer to understand what it all means.
They clearly and openly say that in your IUL dividends are excluded.
It's up to you to know that over the long term, 44% of the return of the S&P500 is due to dividends.
"From 1930 to the end of September 2010, dividends represented 44% of the S&P 500 Index’s 9.3% average annual total return."
It's actually worse that that. Note the "44% of the ANNUAL return".
In the long term, dividends account for 90% of the TOTAL return.
"If you had invested $100 at the end of 1940, this
would have been worth approximately $174,000 at the end of 2011 if you had reinvested dividends, versus $12,000 if dividends were not included."
That S&P/IUL spreadsheet that's floating around shows the same thing.
$100 invested Feb'50 grows to $60,929 with dividends reinvested but only to $7,697 without dividends. That's 87%.
|Copyright 1996-2014 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|