Archives: Articles

IssueM Articles

The Hidden Gold in Mid-Size Rollovers

When 401(k) participants change jobs, they’re not the only ones thinking about where their accounts might go next. Recordkeepers, asset managers, registered investment advisors, automatic rollover specialists, and rollover magnets like Fidelity and E*Trade, to name a few, all take an interest.

The intensity of their interest, of course, depends on the size of the account. The largest accounts are the most sought-after. The smaller ones get cashed out or gobbled up by automatic rollover specialists. The mid-sized pots—worth $5,000 to $50,000— are like odd-sized fish: too small to keep, too big to ignore.  

Too often, says Pete Littlejohn, the director of strategic partnerships at Inspira, a $20 million closely held IRA recordkeeper based in Pittsburgh, the owners of those accounts wind up in steerage on titanic asset management platforms, generating minimal or even negative revenue and receiving barebones yet over-priced service in return.

Littlejohn (right) thinks those investors deserve better. In fact, he thinks the whole IRA food chain would be more efficient if recordkeepers and others farmed out their $5,000-to-$50,000 accounts to white-label IRAs at Inspira—at least until the accounts got bigger. Meanwhile, the account owners would get first-class advice from GuidedChoice and everybody—investor, recordkeeper, asset manager, Inspira and GuidedChoice—would see upside.

Pete Littlejohn

 “We’re building a mechanism for any firm that wants to outsource its most expensive clients,” Littlejohn, who gets excited when he describes the potential for Inspira’s idea, explained to RIJ recently. “We can give them first-class treatment for a quarter to a third of what Wall Street charges. We tell the recordkeeper, ‘You can quit saying either yes or no to a rollover and instead say yes to all of them. If the account balance is below the bar, take it off your expensive legacy based technology chassis and kick it out to us.’”

Inspira can’t go down this road alone; it needs a managed account provider. So it has teamed up with GuidedChoice, the advice firm powered by CEO Sherrie Grabot and Nobelist Harry Markowitz, to provide the same type of managed account to IRA customers that the firm provides to 401(k) participants.

For GuidedChoice, whose direct customers are plan sponsors, the partnership represents a chance to participate, if indirectly, in the rollover business. IRA custodians had apparently been proposing such partnerships to GuidedChoice for some time, and Inspira had a business plan that matched GuidedChoice’s low-cost culture.

“The business kept coming to our doors, from existing clients who wanted to broaden their relationship with us and others,” Ashley Avaregan, a senior vice president at GuidedChoice, told RIJ this week. Its relationship with Inspira is non-exclusive; Inspira is also talking to Georgia-based Financial Soundings about a partnership.   

Perceiving an opportunity

Inspira’s opportunity is predicated on the idea that large, established financial firms that handle rollover IRAs and the 401(k) accounts of separated workers are in a bind over mid-sized accounts. They don’t want to lose the assets but the accounts barely generate enough revenue to cover their maintenance costs. Most of them don’t ideally want to handle accounts below a certain bar, usually about $50,000.

Inspira, a backoffice IRA recordkeeping firm founded in 2002 by Lowell Smith Jr., decided to reach out to those firms—plan recordkeepers, third-party administrators (TPAs), insurance companies and banks—with an offer to take on the management of their below-the-bar accounts.

A 401(k) recordkeeper, for instance, could offer departing employees with smaller accounts the option of rolling over to a white-label IRA at Inspira, under the original company’s logo, or through Inspira‘s own Pinnacle IRA brand. The recordkeeper would incur no further costs, and could even reabsorb the account if and when its value exceeded their bar. In the meantime, Inspira would pay the recordkeeper a modest asset-based income.

The incoming assets would go into a managed account run by GuidedChoice or another low-cost provider. GuidedChoice would put the money into its own menu of low-cost institutional index funds or ETFs. If the recordkeeper had its own proprietary funds, assuming they were no-load and institutionally priced, GuidedChoice could build a managed account out of those.

Shifting the administration of mid-sized rollovers from large companies to Inspira would end up as savings and/or profits for everyone in the chain, including the investor, Littlejohn claims. “It’s 50 to 80 basis points, all in, if we use an institutional investment lineup,” he told RIJ. That would include about 20 basis points for index funds, plus GuidedChoice’s managed account fee, plus Inspira’s fee, plus perhaps 20 basis points for the outsourcer of the account.

If the outsourcer wanted GuidedChoice to build managed accounts out of its proprietary funds, the all-in cost might range from 75 to 110 basis points, he said. Whatever the price, he added, it will cost the underlying client only 25% to 33% of what he or she would have been charged on a large recordkeeper or wirehouse platform.

How can Inspira do that? With low overhead and the zero marginal costs per customer, Littlejohn says. Inspira doesn’t have the legacy IT systems, the investments bricks-and-mortar, or the army of employees. In short, Inspira brings to the rollover business the kinds of advantages that robo-advisors are bringing to the advice business. 

“We don’t have skyscrapers or corporate jets. We don’t build our own IT systems, so they’re never outdated. Software in the 401(k) space is more and more customized. We’re reinventing the IRA delivery system. We’ll give people the same experience that large account owners get at a much lower price.”

‘Begging for reinvention’

Not so coincidentally, all this is taking place at a time when regulators are scrutinizing the rollover process. Phyllis Borzi, director of the Employee Benefit Security Administration, wants to raise the standard for advice-giving on IRA rollovers to the fiduciary level, and to protect qualified account owners from the higher fees they’ll encounter when they roll over to a retail IRA.

“That’s why price was the biggest factor for us out of the gate,” Littlejohn said. “We wanted to beat the DoL to the punch in terms of making management of IRAs a fiduciary act. We’re already where Phyllis wants to go.” 

Given the trillions of dollars in the rollover IRA space, and the fact that a large percentage of the account values are in the $5,000 to $50,000 range, Littlejohn sees a huge opportunity. He expects mid-market IRA business not just from recordkeepers and TPAs, but also from DCIO (defined contribution investment-only) asset managers who want to get an oar in the rollover business, from “affinity” groups like AARP who want to establish white-label rollover IRA programs for their members and perhaps from future state-sponsored DC plans in Illinois, California and Connecticut. “This industry is begging for reinvention,” he said.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Ruark Publishes Biannual VA Usage Study

Ruark Consulting, the Simsbury, Conn., actuarial firm, has published a summary of the results of its latest analyses of full surrender, partial withdrawal and GMIB annuitization behavior among variable annuity contract owners.

Ruark found that:

  • Surrender rates continue to trend downward, but not as steeply. As the number of years left in the surrender periods (and the penalty) goes down, contract owners become more likely to surrender.
  • GMIB (guaranteed minimum income benefit) contracts now have slightly lower surrender rates (higher persistency) than lifetime GMWB contracts, which historically have had the lowest surrenders of all the living benefit types in the Ruark study.
  • Among contracts with living benefits, lapse rates are lower when the guarantee value is high relative to account value. This is true regardless of whether the guarantee is valued nominally or on an actuarial basis (using discount and mortality rates).
  • Excess withdrawals predict a greater chance of surrender. In other words, there’s a markedly higher surrender rate among owners of GLWB contracts who have taken excess withdrawals (amount higher than the maximum allowable) in the past.

Partial withdrawal study

Ruark analyzed over 16 million contract years of lifetime withdrawal (GLWB), non-lifetime withdrawal (GMWB), and withdrawal-oriented (“hybrid”) GMIB rider experience. Almost four million of those contract years included withdrawals, and RCL identified factors that might have affected partial withdrawal behavior:

  • Across the industry, the frequency of withdrawals is up slightly from last year. Most of the marginal bump is at the annual maximum withdrawal amount.
  • The rate of excess withdrawals (withdrawals above the policy’s annual maximum) has not increased over the same period.
  • The level of overall industry withdrawals has not been at what product designers would consider efficient. Some policyholders take withdrawals, which eliminate an annual deferral bonus, that are smaller than the maximum the contract permits, thus under-using the benefit of the income rider.  Others withdraw more than their full income percentage, thus degrading the rider’s guarantee. 
  • GLWB policyholders, once they do begin taking withdrawals, continue to do so in subsequent years at very high frequencies.

GMIB annuitization study

In a separate analysis, Ruark looked at GMIBs with 7-year and 10-year waiting periods. Experience is now emerging on the behavior of owners of the 10-year contracts, which predominated during the past decade. The 30,000 annuitizations in the study provide adequate credibility overall, though reliability declines when the data is finely sub-divided, Ruark said in its release.

Among the findings:

  • GMIB exercise (for all contracts) remains in the single digits and lower than in RCL’s previous study.
  • Age and relative value of the rider (moneyness) drive behavior. The moneyness effect is evident on both a nominal and actuarial (which reflects the rider’s guaranteed income rates) basis.
  • GMIB riders that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have lower exercise rates than those that reduce the benefit proportionately.   
  • There is only a slight effect of duration (time since end of waiting period) on annuitization rates. Exercise is slightly higher at first opportunity than in subsequent years.

Ruark Consulting (RCL) conducts biannual variable annuity experience studies of full surrender, partial withdrawal, and GMIB annuitization behavior. Full results are available only to the study’s 18 participants, including:   

  • AIG Life & Retirement
  • Allianz
  • AXA
  • Commonwealth Annuity & Life
  • Delaware Life
  • Guardian
  • John Hancock
  • Massachusetts Mutual
  • MetLife
  • Nationwide
  • New York Life
  • Ohio National Life
  • Pacific Life
  • Phoenix
  • Protective
  • Prudential
  • Security Benefit
  • Voya (ING)

RCL’s surrender study includes over 44 million contract years of exposure, with 2.6 million surrenders. RCL said it believes that this large sample size, up nearly 20% from last year, allows it to accurately assess the effects of duration, surrender charge period, owner age, distribution channel, commission level, contract size, and inclusion and value of guaranteed benefits on VA surrender rates.   

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Mature Americans need retirement advice (desperately)

Growing wiser is supposed to be one of the consolations of growing older. But there’s new evidence that even older Americans are still toddlers when it comes to understanding retirement finance. (Advisors, please note: This means opportunity.) 

According to a fresh survey from The American College, most people ages 60 to 75 with $100,000 or more in assets “lack the knowledge they need for a financially secure retirement in areas such as life expectancy, Social Security, long-term care needs, investment risk and more.”  

Indeed, only 20% of older Americans passed a basic test given to them as part of the RICP Retirement Income Literacy Survey, sponsored by The American College in Bryn Mawr, Pa., which offers the Retirement Income Certified Professional certification for advisors. Less than one percent scored 91 or better on the test component of the survey, which was designed by Greenwald & Associates.

Many Americans were nonetheless blithe about retirement. More than half (55%) consider themselves “well prepared” to meet their income needs in retirement, and almost all (91%) are at least “moderately confident” in their ability to achieve a secure retirement. 

Respondents know little about preserving their assets in retirement. The oft-cited “four percent rule” for a safe withdrawal rate in retirement is unfamiliar to seven in ten Americans (69%). Sixteen percent thought it would be safe to withdraw 6% or even 8% per year. Twenty percent estimated two percent to be the safest rate.

Most people are also perplexed about when to claim Social Security and how to maximize their benefits.  Only half of respondents (53%) knew that someone with a long life expectancy should ideally wait until age 70 to claim benefits.  
A “disturbing” number of these older respondents showed a lack of knowledge when it comes to understanding the risks associated with stocks or bonds.

  • Only 39% understood that when prevailing interest rates rise, the prices of existing bonds and the net asset values of bond funds will decrease.
  • Only 7% understand that small cap stock funds have historically offered higher long-term returns than large cap stock funds, dividend-paying stock funds, or high-yield bond funds.

Managing longevity risk is apparently a problem for many Americans. More than half  (51%)underestimated the average life expectancy of a 65-year-old man, which is about 18 years. 

Most Americans were also unsure about how to protect themselves from sequence-of-returns risk during the years directly before and after retirement, when their portfolios are especially vulnerable to downside volatility.

  • Only 37% know that someone who intends to retire at age 65 should take less risk at age 65 than earlier or later.
  • Only 30% recognize that working two years longer or deferring Social Security for two years has a bigger impact on retirement readiness than increasing retirement contributions by 3% for five years.
  • Only 27% report having a written retirement plan in place.  
  • 63% say they have a relationship with a financial advisor.
  • 52% are at least “moderately concerned” about running out of money in retirement.  
  • 33% have never tried to figure out how much they need to accumulate to retire securely. 

Survey responses were gathered through online interviews conducted between July 17-25, 2014. A total of 1,019 Americans were interviewed. To qualify for participation in the study, respondents had to be ages 60-75 and have at least $100,000 in household assets, not including their primary residence.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Hungarians protest end of state-sponsored DC plan

Hungary’s experiment with mandatory, privately managed individual retirement accounts, which began back in the bullish days of the late 1990s, appears to be almost over, IPE.com reported.

Under a bill submitted to the Hungarian Parliament, the government will shut down the four remaining funds in the mostly-dismantled “second-pillar” system unless they can prove that at least 70% of their 60,000-odd members have paid regular fees for at least two months over a six-month period. Membership peaked at three million in 2010.

On November 25, several thousand people, rallied by postings on Facebook, marched in protest from the Ministry of National Economy to the Parliament building in Budapest.

If passed, the law could go into effect as early as January 2015. The four funds still in operation are the Budapest Magánnyugdíjpénztár, Horizont Magánnyugdíjpénztár, MKB Nyugdíjpénztár and Szövetség Magánnyugdíjpénztár. Economic minister Mihaly Varga submitted the legislation.

Due to a lack of inflows, the second pillar funds haven’t been able to generate enough retirement income for members, who would be better off forwarding all their contributions to the country’s basic pay-as-you-go, earnings-related Social Security-style state pension, according to Varga.

In a 2011 paper, “The Mandatory Private Pension Pillar in Hungary: An Obituary” Andras Simonovitz, Institute of Economics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, wrote:

In 1998, the left-of-center government of Hungary carved out a second pillar mandatory private pension system from the original mono-pillar public system. Participation in the mixed system was optional for those who were already working, but mandatory for new entrants to the workforce. About 50% of the workforce joined voluntarily and another 25% were mandated to do so by law between 1999 and 2010.

The private system has not produced miracles: either in terms of the financial stability of the social security system, or greatly improved social security in old age. Moreover, the international financial and economic crisis has highlighted the transition costs of pre-funding. Rather than rationalizing the system, the current conservative government de facto ‘nationalized’ the second pillar in 2011 and is to use part of the released capital to compensate for tax reductions.

Leaders of the four pension funds warned that a diversion of contributions back to the state pension would lead to the dissolution of the funds. If they were dissolved, the Hungarian government would acquire some HUF200bn (€651m) in assets, although this has not apparently been factored into the 2015 Budget.

Prime minister Viktor Orbán’s government first took aim at the mandatory pension funds in 1998 by freezing contributions. In 2001, membership of the system became voluntary. On his return to power in 2010, he threatened those who refused to opt back into the state system with the loss of their state pension. Although that move turned out to be unconstitutional, Hungarians began abandoning the funds.

According to data from the National Bank of Hungary, some €12bn of assets were transferred to the state, while the number of members shrank to some 100,600 in 2011 from more than three million in 2010. As of the end of September 2014, membership stood at 61,523 and assets at HUF205.4bn.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Genworth introduces FIA with income rider

Genworth has introduced SecureLiving Growth+ with IncomeChoice, new fixed index annuity with a lifetime income rider for consumers “as young as 45” who want to build a source of retirement income that offers downside protection and growth potential. 

According to a release from from Lou Hensley, Genworth’s president of Life Insurance and Annuities, SecureLiving Growth+ with IncomeChoice offers:  

  • The potential for contract owners to double their income for up to five consecutive years when they are confined to a medical care facility.  
  • Access to “caregiver support advocates” who can help answer care-related questions, access care and help identify potential care facilities.
  • An IncomeChoice rider that provides a guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit, which offers a choice, at retirement, of increasing or level income options for a 1.10% annual charge.
  • 50% credit enhancements before income begins and while the rider is in effect.
  • Four index crediting strategies based on the S&P 500 Index, including a “new patent-pending two-year trigger crediting strategy”.
  • “Bailout renewal protection” that enables the contract owner to make full or partial withdrawals from their contract without surrender charge or market value adjustment.
  • A pro-rated reduction in the rider charge if, during the surrender charge period, the renewal cap for the annual cap strategy is below the bailout rate.
  • The ability to start income distributions anytime after the first contract year without being restricted by the contract anniversary window.
  • Competitive caps and rates.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Income options in DC plans still rare: PSCA

Fewer than 10% of the 613 profit-sharing and 401(k) plans surveyed by the Plan Sponsor Council of America (formerly the Profit-Sharing Council of America) offer a lifetime income option to their participants, according to the PSCA’s 57th Annual Survey of Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plans.

Regarding the use of target-date funds, the report showed that about two-thirds of the plans offered TDFs and that 16.7% of the assets in those plans was invested in those funds. The approximately eight million participants in PSCA plans held about $832 billion of the estimated $6.6 trillion in defined contribution plans in the U.S. in the second quarter of 2014. 

Key findings in the PSCA’s latest report includes data in four areas:

Participant Contributions

  • 21.8 % of companies suggest a rate to employees.
  • 18.8% suggest 6% and 46.5% suggest a rate higher than 6%.
  • Account balances increased by 18.2%.
  • 88.6% of eligible participants have an account balance.
  • 80.3% of eligible participants contributed to the plan.
  • 60% of plans offer a Roth 401(k) option to participants, up from 53.8% in 2012.

Company Contributions

  • Companies contributed an average of 4.7% of pay to the plan in 2013 (up from 4.5% in 2012 and 4.1% five years ago).
  • 80% of plans make a match on employee contributions and 98 % of those plans made the match in 2013.

Investments

  • Plans offer an average of 19 funds, the same as in 2011 and 2012.
  • 66% of plans offer a target-date fund (TDF) to employees with an average of 16.7% of assets invested in them.
  • 37.2% of plans offer an emerging markets fund.
  • Fewer than 10% of plans offer a lifetime income option to participants.

Automatic Enrollment

  • 50.2% of all plans have an automatic enrollment feature (up from 47.2% in 2012) and 44% of all plans have an auto-escalation feature.
  • 40% of plans that don’t offer auto-enrollment state that they are satisfied with their participation rates and a third (32.5%) cite “corporate philosophy” as the reason they don’t use it.
  • Plans with an auto-enroll feature have participation rates 10 percentage points higher than plans that do not.

Education

  • 16.7% of plans offer a comprehensive financial wellness program.
  • 80% of plans evaluate whether their plan is successful.
  • One-third of plans made changes to their plan in 2013 – including almost half of large plans.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

How Jackson National uses iPads to compete

Jackson National Life has begun offering free apps that advisors with iPads can use to access information about Jackson products (the Jackson app) and educational materials about retirement (Retirement Hub). Both apps can be downloaded at the Apple iTunes App store, according to a Jackson release.

The digital tools are part of a new Jackson educational campaign for advisers and clients. The company wants to make it easy for advisors to download Jackson product information and general investing information to tablet computers for presentations.

An app is more than just a shortcut from an iPad to a website; it allows for downloadable content that can be used when there’s no internet connection. And that’s apparently a significant difference.

“There’s definite value to having the publication reside on the iPad versus having to rely on WIFI,” Luis Gomez, vice president of Marketing Strategy for Jackson National Life Distributors, told RIJ. “You can’t always rely on the WIFI. If you’re in the middle of a presentation, you don’t want skips. You want reliability.” Once an app is built, he added, it’s easy to change the content or add animation without going through the process of building an entirely new app.

Not all advisors are equally adept with tablet computers, but Jackson’s own adoption of iPads has evidently sparked advisor usage. “At the beginning of this year we started giving our wholesalers iPads instead of laptops,” Gomez said. “As they visited advisors and went through their stories on the iPads, the advisors started asking, ‘Is that available for me?’

“So we started making the apps available to advisors. From a marketing perspective, it helps reduce time to market. We can update materials and launch in real time, instead of having to go to print. We look at this as a competitive advantage. Other industries already have this, but the financial services industry overall is still playing catch-up. We’re trying to stay ahead of the competition.”

According to a release, Jackson is making the information in the apps “easily digestible” and tailoring it to each client’s “specific knowledge level” and “unique investment goals.”

The Retirement Hub will be refreshed with new educational content each quarter, the release said. The first installment will cover bonds and interest rates, and how bond investors can adapt to rising interest rates. This quarter, the Retirement Hub will also explain portfolio volatility, and the role of correlations between asset types in controlling volatility.

Jackson also recently launched a redesign of the Performance Center on Jackson.com, where users can find current data from Morningstar, Inc. on the performance of the subaccounts in Jackson’s variable annuities.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The Bucket

New York Life acquires ETF company

New York Life Investment Management, the third party global asset management business of New York Life, announced this week that it had agreed to buy IndexIQ, a specialist in the liquid alternative exchange-traded fund (ETF) industry. Terms were not disclosed.

IndexIQ, which will be marketed through New York Life’s MainStay Investments platform, will add an estimated $1.5 billion to MainStay’s $101 billion in assets under management.

Among its 12 fund offerings, IndexIQ is best known for IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI), introduced almost six years ago. It tries to “replicate the risk-adjusted return characteristics of hedge funds using strategies that include long/short equity, global macro, market neutral, event-driven, fixed income arbitrage, emerging markets and other strategies commonly used by hedge fund managers,” according to a release.

IndexIQ also offers a mutual fund version of QAI (Ticker: IQHIX/IQHOX) and is a leading “ETF Strategist” offering ETF Models and Separately Managed Accounts.

The transaction is expected to close in the first half of 2015.  

Fidelity partners with LearnVest and Betterment

Fidelity Institutional, the division of Fidelity Investments, that provides clearing, custody and investment management products to registered investment advisors (RIAs), retirement recordkeepers, broker-dealers, family offices and banks, has announced a new collaboration with LearnVest, as well as providing additional resources to help advisors explore options to digitize their practices.

New Fidelity research confirms a need for advisors to begin integrating digital strategies: 55% plan to target emerging and mass affluent investors1 in the next five years, a segment of investors who are comfortable transacting online and craving more clarity and simplicity in their finances. This is a shift for many advisors, considering that seven in 10 firms report that investors over the age of 49 or with more than $1 million in assets drive their current strategy. 

 “The relationship with LearnVest will help advisors offer clients access to an educational ‘financial wellness’ microsite powered by LearnVest’s original content, as well as preferred pricing to LearnVest’s technology-enabled financial planning program,” according to a Fidelity release.

“The collaboration will be particularly useful for advisors consulting on workplace retirement plans. It adds to Fidelity Institutional Wealth Services’ collaboration with Betterment Institutional, through which RIAs may consider adding a client-facing digital platform to engage growing investor segments, like the emerging affluent, while still delivering the advice for which they are highly valued.”

Fidelity is also launching a new report on the digital landscape in addition to the collaborations with LearnVest and Betterment Institutional. 

Northwestern Mutual completes sale of Russell Investments

Northwestern Mutual has completed the $2.7 billion sale of its subsidiary Frank Russell Company (Russell Investments) to the London Stock Exchange Group plc. Proceeds from the sale, which closed today, will further boost the 2014 financial results of the Milwaukee-based mutual company.

“Russell has been a good investment for us,” said John Schlifske, chairman and CEO of Northwestern Mutual. “Russell’s operating results have made significant contributions to our financial results over the years. When you look at this sale price and the income produced for us since we bought Russell in 1999, you get a rate of return well in excess of equity indices over that period.”

Northwestern Mutual manages more than $184 billion (YE 2013) in invested assets as part of its general account investment portfolio, which backs its insurance and annuity products.

Goldman, Sachs & Co. and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC acted as financial advisors to Northwestern Mutual on this transaction.

Aviva buys Friends Life to become Britain’s biggest insurer 

The life insurance industry continues to consolidate.

In a deal that will create the largest life insurer in Britain, Aviva has agreed to buy rival Friends Life for about $8.8 billion in stock, according to an Aviva release. The resulting insurance and asset management business will be worth about £20.7 billion ($32.4 billion) and manage over £300 billion. 

Under the agreement, 0.74 shares of Aviva were swapped for each share of Friends Life. Friends Life shareholders would also receive a dividend of 24.1 pence a share, for a full-year dividend of 31.15 pence a share. They would own about 26% percent of the combined company, which would have around 16 million customers.

The offer price, with the dividend, represented a 27% premium over the average trading price of Friends Life shares for the three months that ended Nov. 20. At Monday’s closing prices, including the additional dividend, Friends Life was worth about £3.94 a share or about £5.6 billion in total.

The transaction requires shareholder and regulatory approval, and it is expected to close in the second quarter. Aviva sold Aviva USA, its life insurance and annuities business in the U.S., for $2.6 billion in 2013. 

Aviva’s stock has risen about 37% since Mark Wilson joined as chief executive at the beginning of 2013, and its profit has improved. For the first half of 2014, operating profit rose four percent to £1.05 billion. On Tuesday, investors sent shares of Friends Life up 1.9% to £3.73 in early trading in London, while shares of Aviva were up less than on percent to £4.99. The combined company is expected to continue to list its shares in London after the deal.

The deal is expected to result in about £225 million of annual cost savings by the end of 2017, the companies said. After the transaction, Andy Briggs, the chief executive of Friends Life, would become chief of Aviva’s life insurance business in Britain and would join the combined company’s board as an executive director.  

Illinois House passes statewide retirement savings program bill

State lawmakers passed another mandate on businesses Tuesday. Employers with more than 25 employees would have to enroll employees in a retirement savings program, the Illinois News Network reported this week. Employees would be given the option to voluntarily opt-out.

Employers are mandated to participate unless they already provide employees a savings option. Chief sponsor in the house, Barbara Flynn Currie, says employers are already required to withhold things like income taxes and child support from employee’s paychecks. “This is very little different,” she said.

Representative Ron Sandack said the issue should have more investigation before another mandate is levied against small business.

“Yes, people aren’t saving up for retirement, yes we ought to do more to incentivize that,” he said. “No, we shouldn’t mandate a program that we don’t know a thing about. We shouldn’t mandate small business and encumber small business, yet again, with an expense and a burden that we really don’t know anything about.

After having passed the Senate in April, the measure passed the House Tuesday 67-45.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. 

 

Fidelity & Guaranty Life’s FIA sales doubled in fiscal 2014

The holding company Harbinger Group Inc. has announced its consolidated results for the fourth quarter and full year of fiscal 2014 ended last Sept. 30, including results for Fidelity & Guaranty Life, which issues fixed indexed annuities.

FGL more than doubled its annuity sales in both the quarter and the year, and continues to increased its GAAP book value by 45% over the year, according to the Harbinger end-of-year report. The insurance segment, which includes Front Street Re Inc., had about $18.8 billion of assets under management as of Sept. 30. 

Harbinger also announced that its CEO and chairman, Philip Falcone, will resign from both positions, effective this Monday, Dec. 1, 2014, to focus on HC2 Holdings Inc. and Harbinger Capital Partners. Falcone will receive a bonus of $20.5 million at departure. Harbinger’s market capitalization grew from $140 million in 2009 to today’s $2.6 billion.  

Fiscal year results

Annuity sales increased 114% in fiscal 2014, to $2.16 billion. Additionally, during the fiscal 2014 quarter, FGL grew fixed indexed annuities by 91% over the fiscal 2013 quarter and 20% on a sequential basis.  The increase in annuity sales and fixed indexed annuities in both periods is attributable to ongoing marketing initiatives with existing distribution partners as well as the launch of new products.

But the insurance segment’s revenues fell 12.3%, to $283.0 million from $322.8 million, in the fiscal 2014 quarter due to lower net investment gains driven by the segment’s portfolio repositioning activity in fiscal 2013. FGL implemented a tax planning strategy to use certain net operating losses, which resulted in certain non-recurring capital gains.

Operating income for the insurance segment in the fiscal 2014 quarter decreased by $103.4 million, or 61.5%, to $64.6 million from $168.0 million for the fiscal 2013 quarter due to the same factors that affected revenue, the release said. The segment’s adjusted operating income fell 65%, decreased to $31.3 million from $89.3 million in income for the fiscal 2013 quarter.

The insurance segment recorded annuity sales, which are recorded as deposit liabilities (i.e. contract holder funds) in accordance with generally accepted U.S. accounting principles, of $501.6 million for the fiscal 2014 Quarter as compared to $246.9 million in the fiscal 2013 quarter, an increase of $254.9 million, or 103%. 

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Competitiveness of U.S. public equity markets called ‘weak’

Despite the record-breaking initial public offering of the Alibaba Group, U.S. capital market competitiveness showed continued historical weakness through the third quarter of 2014, according to the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, a 35-member group directed by Hal Scott of Harvard.

“While the U.S. capital markets have strengthened in terms of domestic IPOs, the overall competitive landscape internationally continues to disappoint,” said Scott, the Nomura Professor and director of the Program on International Financial Systems at Harvard Law School. “Putting aside Alibaba, the competitiveness of our public markets is significantly worse.”

According to the CCMR release, “Alibaba’s choice of New York over Hong Kong was driven primarily by a desire for a dual share class structure, which could not be achieved in Hong Kong, rather than a judgment about the appeal of the U.S. regulatory framework and liability rules, i.e. securities class actions. Moreover, ‘bonding’ to a lower standard of governance is not the way to restore the competitiveness of the public market. Excluding Alibaba’s historic listing, a number of additional key measures of market competitiveness showed continued weakness.” They included:

  • U.S. share of global IPOs by foreign companies sits at 9.0%, continuing the trend of foreign companies avoiding U.S. equity markets.  This measure remains far below the historical average of 26.8% (1996-2007).
  • Foreign companies that did raise equity capital in the United States through the third quarter of 2014 did so overwhelmingly via private rather than public markets. Approximately 84% of initial offerings of foreign equity in the United States were conducted through private Rule 144A offerings rather than public offerings. This measure of aversion to U.S. public equity markets stands significantly higher than the historical average of 66.1% (1996-2007).
  • Cross-listing activity in the U.S. by foreign companies for non-capital raising purposes remained low. Activity through the third quarter of 2014 suggests only 3 foreign companies will cross-list in the U.S. this year for purposes other than capital raising (such as bonding to U.S. standards), fewer than in any year since 2008, and well below the historical average of 17 cross-listings per year.

The CCMR believes that the policy recommendations in its 2006 Interim Report remain essential to the restoration of U.S. competitiveness. “In addition, we urge regulators implementing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to minimize the adverse competitive effects of new regulations, particularly in areas where the U.S. regulatory approach differs significantly from competitor markets,” said Scott, in a release.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. 

A VA with a little bit of everything, from Principal

The Principal Financial Group has introduced a series of Swiss Army-knife type of variable annuity that allows investors to accumulate through traditional and alternative investments and decumulate through a no-cost deferred income rider option.

The series is called Principal Pivot, and the name refers to ability of contract owners to “pivot” from accumulation to income. The contract owner can make periodic transfers from the mutual fund sleeve to an income sleeve ($5,000 minimum for first transfer, $1,000 each thereafter), and to set income to begin at a future date (by age 70½ for qualified contracts and age 95 for non-qualified).

The product has a current mortality and expense risk fee of 1%. Fund expense ratios range from a low of 0.65% to a high of 2.63%. There’s a return of premium death benefit rider available for an extra 20 basis points and an annual step-up death benefit rider for 35 basis points. A Liquidity Max rider exempts the contract owner from paying surrender fees. It currently costs 25 basis points. There’s also a 15-basis point administrative fee and a $30 annual fee.

Fund families offered under the contract include American Century, American, Calvert, Deutsche, Fidelity, Franklin Templeton, Goldman Sachs, Guggenheim Partners, Invesco, Janus, MFS, PIMCO, Principal, Rydex and Van Eck. Contract owners can get exposure to alternative assets like commodities and real estate, along with long/short strategies, hedge funds and managed volatility funds.

As an all-in-one package, the Pivot also includes built-in investment guidance systems. According to a press release, it offers clients “three investment approaches. There’s a personalized strategy for clients who prefer to create a fully-customizable investment portfolio based on their investment objectives; a guided strategy for those who want guidance on which investments to choose that meet their risk profile and investment objectives; and an asset allocation strategy for those who want a managed approach to investing and diversification that includes a mix of stocks, bonds and other investment options.”

The contract offers some flexibility around start dates and liquidity. Once contract owners moves money from the separate account to the deferred income account, they can’t move it back or access it in any way other than the annuity payment method they’ve chosen. But they can move their income start date once, and they can get accelerated lump sum payments (up to six months’ worth at a time) up to four times during the income period. If the start date is accelerated or delayed, the annuity payments decrease or increase accordingly.

Principal Pivot VA bears a resemblance to the two-sleeve VAs of the past, such as the Hartford Personal Retirement Manager. That product allowed contract owners to gradually move money from a separate account to a fixed-return account destined for income. The Pivot isn’t as flexible; the Hartford product allowed contract owners to reverse their contributions to the fixed account, subject to a market value adjustment. With the Pivot, contributions to the income account are irrevocable after the 10-day free look period.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. 

Vanguard continues to dominate fund in-flows

Fixed income is the focus of the November issue of The Cerulli Edge – U.S. Monthly Product Trends. Its Monthly Spotlight feature takes a close look at product development in the area of managed volatility strategies.

The strong flow of assets into Vanguard funds, driven by the appeal of low-cost passive investing, was again reflected in the report. As of October, Vanguard has almost $2.2 trillion in mutual fund assets, an 18.5% market share. With 10.4% and 9.9% market shares, Fidelity and American Funds run a distant second and third, respectively.

Vanguard funds saw inflows of $17.45 billion in October and $165.4 billion for the first ten months of 2014. YTD, Dimensional Fund Advisors was second with $24.4 billion. PIMCO shed $43.8 billion in October and $109 billion through October 2014.

Among the top-ten fund families for equity fund flows in the first ten months of 2014, Vanguard occupied the top four spots, with its Total Stock Market Index, Five Hundred Index, Mid-Cap Index and Small Cap Index Funds. Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund had the highest in-flows among international equity mutual funds for October and for 2014.

The mutual fund with the highest inflows in October 2014, however, was the Metropolitan West Total Return Bond Fund, with $6.7 billion. This intermediate-term, actively managed bond fund has returned 5.63% through November 25. It holds as much as 20% of its assets in below-investment grade securities, has more than 35% of assets in mortgage-backed securities and holds just 32.7% in U.S. government issues. The expense ratio of its non-institutional share class is 68 basis points.

Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund, by contrast, has 64% U.S. government securities and holds no bonds with a rating under Baa. The expense ratio of its Investor Shares is 20 basis points and for its Admiral Shares ($10,000 minimum) is eight basis points. It has also had a good year, with a return of 5.34% through November 25.

Other highlights from this month’s report included:

  • Total mutual fund flows were negative (-$6.7 billion) for the second month in a row. The taxable bond mutual fund asset class experienced redemptions for a second straight month. International equity mutual funds garnered the most flows in October ($3.4 billion).
  • ETF assets grew 2.9% in October, bringing total assets closer to $2 trillion. ETF flows reached their highest level thus far in 2014, reaping $29.9 billion in October.
  • Investors are increasingly considering unconstrained or absolute return fixed-income strategies. Asset managers feel compelled to position clients against volatility and future rate tightening.
  • Retail investors’ appetite for income and reduced tax exposure will persist as Baby Boomers shift into retirement. Most financial advisors (78%) surveyed currently use municipal bond funds, and generally have sufficient understanding of their role in a portfolio.  

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. 

The staid world of Dutch pensions is evolving: ABP

Life expectancy in Europe could eventually break through the “120-year ceiling,” and Dutch pension plans must be prepared for it, according to a report by the €334bn Dutch pension fund ABP, which covers government, education and public employees. ABP’s findings were summarized at IPE.com.

“Pension funds must look at ways of spreading the effects of longevity evenly across the generations,” the report said.

ABP, which has 2.8 million participants in a country of less than 17 million, pointed to pension trends in the Netherlands that may sound familiar to American plan sponsors: The need among participants for “clear and tailor-made” information, downward pressure on asset management fees, and demand for greater transparency.

“Pension funds are already divesting from high-cost asset classes, such as hedge funds and private equity,” low-cost pension vehicles are emerging, and pension arrangements are likely to be simpler and more uniform, the report said.

Increasing “individualization” in Dutch society, combined with an aging population, is apparently putting pressure on the traditions of collectivity and solidarity that underpin defined benefit pensions. Partly because Europeans are changing jobs more often and more are self-employed, and participants are demanding more flexibility in managing their own retirement accounts, the report said.

In defense of the collective retirement system, ABP argued that “a thorough explanation of the material advantages of collectivity and solidarity could help reverse this trend, and that improved management of individuals’ data could help produce tailor-made pension products.”

ABP said it expected the government to “decrease tax-facilitated pensions accrual” in defined benefit plans, causing Dutch workers to look for other ways to save for retirement. This, in turn, will accelerate the development of defined contribution products, it said.

ABP said population aging would require an increasingly defensive investment mix, with lower expected returns, and warned that the growing mobility of capital would weaken the benefits of diversification.

Consolidation among Dutch pension funds will also continue, particularly among employer-sponsored plans, while cost-cutting on pension arrangements and the increase in the official retirement age will increase the “uniformity” of pension plans, ABP said, predicting that “there could be no more than 100 pension funds left in 2020.”

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Canadians feel as insecure about retirement as we do

Nearly a third of Canadians aged 55 to 70 don’t know when they will retire, according to a survey by the LIMRA Security Retirement Institute. The oldest members of the survey group (ages 65 to 70) are the most undecided; about one in 10 don’t expect to retire all.

The report, Ready, Set, Retire? Not So Fast!… Revisited: A Canadian Consumer Retirement Study, is a follow-up to two previous studies that LIMRA conducted in Canada, one in 2010 and the other, 2012.

As in 2012, the majority of Canadian pre-retirees acknowledge a need for more guaranteed lifetime income in retirement than they’ll get from their government pension plans. Among the survey results:

  • More than a fifth of those surveyed say having guaranteed income for life is the most important feature when selecting products to create income in retirement.
  • Three in 10 pre-retirees do not have primary financial advisors to reach their financial goals.
  • Among those pre-retirees who have financial advisors, six in 10 consider the advice they receive to be very valuable.

LIMRA conducted the study in late 2013. The sample included 1,800 respondents polled by research vendor Greenwich Associates.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

QLACs: The ‘Greek yogurt’ of Retirement Products?

Broccoli is just cabbage with a college education, Mark Twain said. And for those of you who believe that deferred income annuities (DIAs) are just fancy immediate annuities and that qualifying longevity annuity contracts are just fancy DIAs—and that they’re all boring—then you’ve probably ignored QLACs altogether.

That might be doubly true if you’d never sell or even recommend an insurance product to a Boomer. Or if you don’t work at one of the mutual insurance companies, where most of the slow but steady SPIA/DIA/QLAC sales action inevitably takes place.

But for income wonks—you know who you are—who love to combine investment and insurance products (for tranquility and more freedom to get frisky with the rest of the retirement portfolio) then you probably thrill to QLACs the way a health nut thrills to cruciferous vegetables like broccoli or kale.

A little exposition: QLACs—Qualifying Longevity Annuity Contracts—are average-size (up to $125,000) DIAs, by definition purchased with pre-tax savings, from which income doesn’t have to flow until age 85. That’s well past the usual age 70½ commencement date for taxable distributions from qualified accounts. Importantly, a QLAC has tax-reducing potential, because during the deferral period the premium can be excluded from the calculation of required minimum taxable distributions from qualified accounts.

The long-awaited Treasury announcements about QLACs in July and October have triggered some interesting new discussions about longevity annuities. The Brookings Institute hosted a forum on QLACs in Washington on November 6. This week, New York Life sponsored a QLAC webinar, hosted by the Retirement Income Industry Association.

Three sales opportunities

The beauty part of the RIIA/New York Life webinar came, I thought, when Scott Bredikis, director, Guaranteed Income Annuities, at New York Life, described QLAC business opportunities. New York Life, of course, owns about half the small but rapidly growing DIA market, with over $1 billion a year in sales. More than three-quarters of DIAs are purchased with qualified money, he said. Almost all are purchased with a cash or installment refund at death.

QLACs potentially create three types of sales opportunities to three types of pre-retirees or retirees, New York Life believes. One scenario involves a person who buys a QLAC as pure longevity insurance, paying up to $125,000 (or 25% of qualified savings, if less) at age 65 for income at age 85.

A second anticipated scenario involves a 60-year-old who anticipates working part-time for another ten or 15 years, and who wants to set up a guaranteed income stream of $18,508 (at current rates) that starts at age 75, while reducing some of his RMD. He makes an initial purchase premium of $60,000 at age 60, and then makes partial payments of $6,500 a year for 10 years.

In the third scenario, a person would use a QLAC to fund a personal defined benefit pension. He or she might start contributing $5,000 a year for 20 years starting at age 50, to create an income stream of $36,558 a year at age 80. 

Asked which of the three scenarios is likely to generate the most sales, Bredikis picked the second one. That made sense. Give the public’s resentment of RMDs, the QLACs’ ability to put a small dent in them is expected to enhance their appeal. Also, current DIA sales patterns do not suggest a widespread desire to use longevity annuities as DIY pensions or as pure longevity insurance.

All of the New York Life scenarios involved a single purchaser. Ron Mizrachi, a New York Life tax attorney, said that the QLAC regulations don’t, for instance, allow couples to pool their IRA savings to fund one joint-life QLAC. Either spouse could buy a joint-life QLAC, but the purchase premium would have to come from a single IRA. 

QLACs as the next ‘Greek yogurt’

At the well-attended discussion at the Brooking Institution, the prominent liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., it was suggested that QLACs might create a spike in demand for income annuities, just as Greek yogurt created a surprise spike in demand for yogurt.

That comment marked one of the lighter moments of the two-hour meeting. At one of the more serious moments, the discussion turned to the issue of whether variable annuities or fixed indexed annuities with living benefits will ever be considered as QLACs.

Greek yogurt image

Under the new QLAC rules, deferred income annuities are the only types of annuities where the RMD rules are suspended during the deferral period. But manufacturers of other types of annuities would love to have the same market-expanding privilege. Kim O’Brien, president of the National Association for Fixed Annuities (NAFA), told RIJ recently that she’s leading a contingent to Washington in December to make a case for her products.

At the Brookings meeting, Don Fuerst, an actuary, argued in favor of including variable and indexed annuities as QLACs because their exposure to equities or equities indices offers protection against inflation risk in retirement, which he suggested is as big a danger as longevity risk.

“It’s not really a predictable source of income you need, it’s purchasing power that you need,” he said. “If you have a predictable source of income and inflation is two percent over 20 years, you’re going to lose a third of your purchasing power. And if it happens to be three percent you’re going to lose almost half your purchasing power.

“Now if you can invest in a diversified portfolio you have a potential for exceeding those fixed income rate and having the income be higher. So we think that providing that kind of flexibility in what we might call a variable income annuity or an investment indexed annuity would protect people against another risk, and that’s the inflation risk. It’s not a guarantee, but a guarantee is—I’d like to make the point—are very expensive.”  

J. Mark Iwry, the Treasury official responsible for shaping the QLAC tax benefits from which VAs and FIAs are at least temporarily excluded, responded by saying that longevity annuities were the right place to start, given their simplicity. He also noted that inflation-adjusted longevity annuities are allowed by the new regulations. In addition, he said that the growth potential of the non-annuitized assets in their retirement accounts offers the upside potential that fixed-rate longevity annuities don’t provide.  

But he didn’t rule out the use of VAs and FIAs as QLACs. “We did very much leave the door open to other approaches that could be permitted in the lifetime income longevity annuity space,” he said. “… This is a final reg, but this is not a final step in this whole process of regulation. In no way is this intended to suggest that variable products or indexed annuities don’t have a potentially important and very constructive place to play, nor to suggest that they would not be part of similar guidance that’s issued in the future.”

Certainly, some policy wonks [though not all; some think Social Security reform is a bigger priority] hope that if enough people talk long enough and loudly enough about longevity annuities, America will embrace both DIAs and QLACs. It was Ben Harris, co-director of Brookings’ Retirement Security Project, who compared QLACs to Greek yogurt.   

“People’s attitudes can change,” he said. “Right while I was sitting here I was trying to think of an example of something that went from being unpopular to being very popular: Greek yogurt. Overnight we decided as a country that we loved Greek yogurt. The sales of Greek yogurt went up 2500% in five years.

“I can see a tipping point where once you’ve become more familiar with the product, and once your neighbors start buying longevity annuities, and once your employer sort of implicitly endorses it by offering them in their [retirement plan]… once you get all these sort of implicit endorsements, [you’ll ask,] Is it at least worth considering? You might see an uptake in the consumer behavior.”

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Going Dutch, with a DB-DC Hybrid

A new plan for reforming the Dutch pension system would combine the best features of individual accounts and collective risk-sharing methods or “buffers,” according to Pensioen Pro, an affiliate of IPE.com.

The plan would take advantage of a new freedom that Dutch pension architects enjoy. They no longer have to adhere to a nominal funding rate, so they can create custom solutions that match the needs of their participants.

The plan reflected a compromise among pension experts who don’t normally agree: academics, a political activist, regulators and representatives of APG and PGGM, two giant Dutch workplace pensions.

Netspar, the pension think tank, had encouraged the experts to work on a compromise. Their proposal will become part of a ‘national pensions dialogue’ organized by the Dutch Department of Social Affairs and Labor.

Under the proposal, the guarantees that are typical of defined benefit arrangements are replaced by transparent information regarding the pension benefits that participants might expect—but without the guarantees.

Individual retirement accounts would show each individual’s savings, including contributions and investment returns. The individual accounts would also reflect any insurance premiums paid, such as disability insurance.

Collective capital buffers would offer protection from market shocks. The buffers would be funded during times of high investment returns, while participants would receive payments from the collective during times of negative investment returns.

Participants would replenish depleted buffers over time through ‘recovery contributions,’ allowing shocks to be spread over generations. Other collective features would be retained, including shared investment and benefits administration. Each pension fund would be able to decide which risks participants should share.

Macro longevity risks and inflation risks might be shared, for instance, and, in extraordinary circumstances, pension fund trustee boards may be given the authority to effect a wealth transfer. The use of individual retirement accounts, meanwhile, would show each participant exactly how much these forms of solidarity would cost.

Contribution levels would remain constant throughout a participant’s lifetime, while investments would be tailored according to lifecycle principles, with the important option to continue allocating to risk-bearing investments after retirement.

Other specifics of the proposal include:

  • Investments would be organized collectively for benefits of scale, but allowing for some individual choice, particularly concerning risk profile.
  • Because pension funds are no longer bound by the need to maintain a set nominal funding rate, schemes would be able to cater to their participants’ investment needs.
  • Plans would work toward a target benefit level.
  • Premium contribution levels would consider expected returns.
  • Participants would be offered a choice in terms of benefits – receiving higher benefits initially and then tapering off, for instance.
  • During the payout phase, participants may buy annuities from the fund, while the fund itself invests to fund these annuities.
  • As the scheme remains invested in equities, the risk level will be a bit higher, so annuities are not 100% guaranteed.
  • Alternatively, participants may choose to pay out their own benefits from their individual account.
  • If they should die prematurely, their savings account will be absorbed by the collective, which uses the money to fund benefits for those who live longer than expected.

The academics have published their proposal ahead of a nationwide review of the existing pensions system.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Indexed and deferred income annuity sales shine in 3Q2014: LIMRA

Total U.S. annuity sales reached $58.2 billion in the third quarter of 2014, off 2% from the same period in 2013. In the first nine months of 2014, total U.S. annuity sales rose 6%, compared with 2013, to reach $177.7 billion.

“The 50 basis-point drop in interest rates since the start of the year has dampened interest in fixed products, pulling down third quarter sales,” explained Todd Giesing senior analyst, LIMRA Secure Retirement Institute Annuity Research, in a release.

But indexed annuities and deferred income annuities have done well.

Index annuity sales grew 15% in the third quarter, to $11.7 billion.  YTD, indexed annuity sales grew 31%, totaling $36 billion. The indexed annuity guaranteed living benefits (GLBs) election rate was 69% (when available) in the third quarter 2014.

2014 Third quarter annuity sales LIMRA

Deferred income annuity (DIA) sales reached $670 million in the third quarter, 21% higher than the prior year. In the first nine months of 2014, DIA salesjumped 35%, totaling $2.0 billion. The top three writers continue to drive most of the DIA sales, accounting for 75% of third quarter DIA sales. They are New York Life, MassMutual, and Northwestern Mutual Life.

Total fixed annuity sales were $22.7 billion in the third quarter, down five percent versus prior year. Year-to-date (YTD), fixed annuity sales reached $71.8 billion, a 21% increase from 2013.

Sales of fixed-rate deferred annuities (Book Value and MVA) fell 32% in the third quarter, compared with prior year. Fixed-rate deferred annuities reached $22.4 billion in the first nine months, an 8% increase compared to last year.

Single premium immediate annuity sales were up 10% in the third quarter to reach $2.3 billion. YTD, SPIA sales jumped 30% to reach $7.4 billion. LIMRA Secure Retirement Institute predicts SPIA sales will exceed current annual sales records. 

Variable annuity (VA) sales fell 1% in the third quarter, to $35.5 billion. YTD, VAs reached $105.9 billion, a 3% drop from 2013. LIMRA Secure Retirement Institute researchers noted many of the top VA sellers are focusing on diversification of their VA GLB business. In the second quarter, a few of the top companies entered the market with accumulation-focused product without a GLB rider. Election rates for VA GLB riders, when available, were 76% in the third quarter of 2014.

The third quarter Annuities Industry Estimates can be found in the updated LIMRA Data Bank. To view variable, fixed and total annuity sales over the past 10 years, please visit Annuity Sales 2004-2013LIMRA Secure Retirement Institute’s second quarter U.S. Individual Annuities Sales Survey represents data from 94% of the market.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Life/annuity stocks struggle as low interest rates persist: A.M. Best

The major publicly traded life and annuity stocks underperformed the broad-based S&P 500 index during the third quarter of 2014—posting a 1.3% loss versus a 1.1% gain—according to a new Best’s Special Report from A.M. Best.  

Of the 24 stocks reviewed in the report, eight had positive performance during the third quarter, while 16 declined. A big part of the reason: the expected rise in interest rates did not materialize, and earnings guidance and outlooks moved toward a more tempered interest rate forecast for an extended period.

“Previous quarters had been positive as companies strengthened their balance sheets, and combined with consolidations through mergers and acquisitions, this positioned them to take advantage of the anticipated rising rate environment,” A.M. Best said in a release.

With an appreciation of 7.6%, Voya Financial, Inc. was the best performing of the stocks in the third quarter of 2014. With solid second quarter results, Voya “continues to be well capitalized, and management has decided to increase the company’s stock repurchase program by USD 500 million, which investors viewed favorably,” the release said.

With a share price decline of 24.7%, GenworthFinancial, Inc. was the worst-performing stock in the third quarter. “Despite its promising mortgage insurance business, Genworth continues to struggle in its long-term care segment with elevated and persistent claims,” the release said.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

MetLife, Fidelity partner on new VA with return-of-premium guarantee

MetLife and Fidelity Investments have launched a new deferred variable annuity product that provides investors with growth potential through Fidelity funds and protection against loss by MetLife if held for a minimum of 10 years. The product, called the MetLife Accumulation Annuity is distributed only through Fidelity.

The product’s Preservation and Growth Rider resembles what used to be called “guaranteed minimum account balance” rider, or GMAB. The guarantee is designed to give investors the confidence to wait out market downturns with the knowledge that, assuming they don’t take withdrawals for ten years, they’ll get at least their original investment back.

But the overall product is expensive. A contract owner would pay 2.68% per year for the fund and the insurance wrapper, according to the product prospectus. The annual mortality and expense risk charge for the product is 0.70% and the rider fee is 1.15%. The contract owners also pay 0.83% per year for the underlying Fidelity fund. If the contract owner takes advantage of a step-up to a higher guaranteed account value, the rider fees may go up. 

In other words, on a $100,000 investment in the product, the contract owner would pay more than $25,000 over 10 years in fees for protection against the chance that a relatively low-risk portfolio will be worth less in a decade than it is today.

According to Fidelity’s website, the underlying investment is the Fidelity VIP FundsManager 60% portfolio, which aims for a 42% allocation to domestic equities, and 18% allocation to international equities, 35% bonds and five percent cash.

The investor is guaranteed at least a return of the initial investment at the end of a ten-year period, with proportionate adjustment for any withdrawals. That is, if the account value starts at $100,000 and goes down to $80,000, a $5,000 withdrawal would reduce the guaranteed amount not to $95,000 but to $93,750. 

If the account is worth more than the initial investment on any contract anniversary, the contract owner can step up the floor amount to the new higher amount, but a new 10-year guarantee period will begin.

Fidelity already offers several MetLife annuity products, including the MetLife Growth and Incomedeferred variable annuity and the MetLife Guaranteed Income Builder fixed deferred income annuity.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.