No. of Recommendations: 6
With a zero annual floor, at a 20 year average all-in expense ratio under 1%, and a 90% leveragability at net zero cost (and actually often a positive credit arbitrage,)... nobody's brought forth anything that can outperform.

It doesn't always outperform accounts with deper loss tolerances... but if you want more risk in order to chase more profits, the liquidity lets you do it on a smart selection basis, rather than being forced to "weather it out" during drawdowns.

I have no idea what "90% leveragability" means -- but it sounds suspiciously like going to 90% margin in your retirement account. Not something to boast about, IHMO.

Okay, here's the statistics for S&P500 B&H and IUL, 0/12 (floor/cap), 1% expenses, 1950 to 2013, all rolling 20-year periods.
Avg 10.8% 6.2%
Min 6.2% 4.8%
Max 17.8% 8.0%
Med 11.0% 6.1%

The S&P performance is *better* than the IUL. The worst case is better. The average/median case is better. The best case is better.

To repeat, The worse cast is better. Even the worst case is better. Since the worst case is better, the risk is NOT greater.
Print the post  


The Retirement Investing Board
This is the board for all discussions related to Investing for and during retirement. To keep the board relevant and Foolish to everyone, please avoid making any posts pertaining to political partisanship. Fool on and Retire on!
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.