Re: Annuities...are they a crap shoot?

On Apr 4, 8:02 pm, Don <dwz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> It is well known that the past returns of financial products depends a
> lot on the starting dates and ending dates chosen for examples like
> this. Would the advantage of the secondary guarantee be as noticeable
> if, say, you began in 1956 and ended in 1996. or began in 1980 and
> ended in 2005, and so on? In examples like this it would be helpful to
> know the broad picture showing the whole range of possible starting
> dates and ending dates. That would give an indication of the actual
> probabillities that an investor would make out better one way or the
> other.

Agreed. 40 years was used because the market data was readily
available and significantly long. Can you imagine the uproar, if I had
used, say, three random years in the middle of the 80's? Taking a
quick, uncalculated glance, there really isn't a period of time in
recent history that isn't marred with the occassional negative or low
postitive return. It is in these years that the guarantee gains
ground.

If anything, the uncertainty that your question brings to light is
even more of a reason why one may want to employ an insurance product.
It eliminates the risk.

--------------------------------------
Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators
strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond.  For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM
THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on
the
Newsgroup.