Archives: Articles

IssueM Articles

Advisors, investors talk past each other, says Russell report

Advisors and clients evaluate a portfolio’s performance differently, according to the Financial Professional Outlook, Russell Investment’s latest quarterly survey of U.S. financial advisors.

The current iteration of the FPO includes responses from about 600 financial advisors working in 141 national, regional and independent advisory firms nationwide.   

While 53% of advisors surveyed said they “measure performance in terms of the portfolio’s progress towards meeting the client’s investing goals,” only 29% say clients also measure performance this way.

Instead, advisors said that clients typically gauge portfolio performance by short-term factors such as one-year returns (54%), the portfolio’s absolute return (49%) and portfolio volatility (41%).

“With the market volatility seen in 2011, it’s not surprising that individual investors are fixated on one-year returns and portfolio volatility. But there is little actionable value in these short-term, backward-looking measures for the individual investor,” said Frank Pape, director of Consulting Services for Russell’s U.S. advisor-sold business.   

Most advisors (78%) were optimistic about the capital markets over the next three years (78%), but only 18% of advisors believed that clients shared that optimism. While this is higher than the 9% recorded in the December iteration of the FPO survey, it is below levels seen in early 2011.

In 2012, advisors on average expect a 3.9% return for a conservative portfolio, 5.9% for a balanced portfolio and 8.3% for an aggressive portfolio. Despite client pessimism, the advisors say that clients’ return expectations are slightly higher than their own: 4.3% for a conservative portfolio, 6.5% for a balanced portfolio and 9.3% for an aggressive portfolio.

“The broad equity markets have already met or surpassed the expectations of advisors and their clients in the latest FPO, with the U.S. broad market Russell 3000 Index up 9.49%, the Russell Global ex-U.S. Index up 13.5% and the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index up 0.85% year-to-date as of 2/29/12. But we are only three months into the year and anything could happen,” Pape said.   

Priorities differ between advisors and their clients, advisors say. Advisors are most likely to want to talk about portfolio rebalancing and asset allocation, but only 11% of advisors say clients raised this topic themselves.

Additional topics introduced to clients by advisors included portfolio performance (34%) and running out of money in retirement (30%). Clients most often initiated conversations around market volatility (56%), government policy (49%), global events (39%) and portfolio performance (39%).

© RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Uniform fiduciary standard will require new technology: Citi

Potential new rules recommended in an SEC Staff study on uniform fiduciary standards for both broker-dealers (BDs) and registered investment advisors (RIAs) will affect many aspects of their activities, according to a new whitepaper from Citi.

Creating investor proposals, account ‘on-boarding,’ suitability assessments, fee arrangements, initial portfolio implementation and portfolio rebalancing would likely be affected by harmonized standards, said the paper, entitled Broker-Dealers as Fiduciaries? How the SEC Staff’s Study Could Raise the Bar for Investment Advice.

“Financial advisors can expect significant technological and operational challenges to adhere to any new fiduciary standards,” said report co-author Andrew Clipper, head of Wealth Management Services in North America, Citi’s Securities and Fund Services. The paper points out that broker-dealers and RIAs may need better technology in the following areas:

  • Automatic linkage from front-to-back of an investor’s information, risk profile, restrictions, proposed portfolio and portfolio execution
  • Access across all investment vehicle types within and across multiple accounts in the household
  • Household reporting and rebalancing across multiple account types (e.g., brokerage, retirement, trust)
  • Tax optimization at the individual investor (tax return) level and across the household

Compliance is expected to be expensive. “Both the SEC and FINRA have recently explored using technology to assist in conducting examinations, and the SEC recognized in the Study on Investment Advisers and Broker-Dealers that BDs may incur on-going costs in developing or acquiring technology,” should the broker-dealer exclusion from the definition of investment adviser be eliminated, said George Magera, a partner in Reed Smith LLP’s Investment Management Group. 

Additional copies of “Broker-Dealers as Fiduciaries? How the SEC Staff’s Study Could Raise the Bar for Investment Advice” can be obtained by writing to [email protected] or calling 877-682-2278.

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Millionaire ranks grew by 200,000 in 2011

Thanks to a buoyant stock market, the number of U.S. households with a net worth of $1 million or more NIPR (not including primary residence) rose by 200,000 to 8.6 million in 2011, according to the Spectrem Group’s Affluent Market Insights 2012 report. There are about 115 million households in the U.S.

It marks the third consecutive year of growth following the 27% decline in millionaire households to 6.7 million in 2008. The total millionaire population remains below the pre-recession high in 2007 of 9.2 million, however.

The ranks of all affluent investors increased in 2011:

• Those with $100,000 or more in net worth NIPR reached 36.7 million from 36.2 million in 2010
• Those with $500,000 or more in net worth NIPR climbed to 13.8 million from 13.5 million in 2010
• Those with $5 million or more in net worth NIPR rose to 1.078 million from 1.061 million in 2010*
• Those with $25 million or more in net worth NIPR grew to 107,000 from 105,000 in 2010*
(*Numbers included in, not in addition to, millionaire households)

Wealthy investors remain worried about the future, however. “Even if they are not directly impacted, continuing high unemployment and the depressed housing market are bedeviling wealthy investors,” said George H. Walper, Jr., president of Spectrem Group, in a release. “Investor optimism has climbed from negative in April 2011 to neutral in February 2012, according to our monthly Spectrem Affluent Investor Confidence Index, but investor outlook won’t significantly improve until unemployment falls significantly lower.”

Home values still make up a big part of the total wealth of many households. According to Spectrem, the primary residence makes up:
• 29% of total assets for Mass Affluent ($100,000 – $999,999 Net Worth NIPR)
• 16% of total assets for Millionaire ($1MM-$5M Net Worth NIPR)
• 9% of total assets for Ultra High Net Worth: (5MM+ Net Worth NIPR)

Additional wealthy investor insights from Spectrem are available at www.MillionaireCorner.com.

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

In Case You Missed the RIIA Conference

Bernie Madoff laundered cash for Bogota drug lords. The most reliable leading economic indicator is the level of fossil fuel reserves. Plan sponsors should brace themselves for a flood of proposals for new in-plan retirement income programs.

Those bits of news, among others, were gleaned from the Retirement Income Industry Association’s spring conference at Morningstar’s headquarters this week in sultry Chicago, where ornamental pear trees bloomed oddly out of season.

This year’s RIIA conference, where 120 attendees gathered in a raked, red-chaired lecture hall that faces the untitled Picasso sculpture in Daley Plaza, focused on creating a dialogue between two distribution channels—retail (individual) and defined contribution (institutional)—that rarely talk to each other.

The two-day meeting was segmented into three subject areas—trust, demographics and innovation—and each day’s panels and presentations were anchored by an outside-the-retirement-business speaker: Frank Casey, a money man who blew the whistle on Madoff, and Tim Garrett, a physicist who believes the supply (and price) of energy explains just about everything else in the economy.

‘Bernie’ and dwindling oil reserves

Casey related the sobering and diverting saga of how, in the process of trying to duplicate Madoff’s returns in the late 1990s at Rampart Investment Management, he and analyst Harry Markopolos deduced that the returns couldn’t be duplicated because they were fraudulent.

One enduring mystery of the case has been why the SEC ignored Casey and Markopolos’ warnings about Madoff; Casey attributed it to incompetence, not corruption. In response to a question, he affirmed rumors that Madoff’s scheme included laundering Colombian drug money, and that he, Casey, was at times afraid for his life.

Garrett’s presentation on peak oil—though he didn’t use that expression—also concentrated the mind. Plentiful coal, oil, and natural gas drove the tide of technical innovation in the late 19th and mid-20th centuries, he said. The fact that the world was discovering new fossil fuel reserves faster than it was burning them caused the Baby Boom itself, he believed, whose progress through adulthood drove the 1982-2000 bull market.

Unfortunately, the age of cheap energy appears all but over, Garrett said, and unless new reserves are discovered soon, the world’s economy will, literally, run out of gas. Oddly, he didn’t have much to say about the constraints imposed by global warming or the potential for salvation through renewable energy resources.

Two in-plan annuities

Very interesting, you say, but what about retirement income? Two specific annuities for the 401(k) market came to light, one in a formal presentation and one during one of the networking sessions. In a formal presentation, David Deming of Dimensional Retirement, an affiliate of Dimensional Fund Advisors, announced—or rather, re-announced, since it has had a  website for some time—a personal pension product called Dimensional Managed DC.

This product, which RIJ will report on in a subsequent issue, allows plan participants to contribute to a part-TIPS, part-global equity managed account whose assets are intended to be used to buy an annuity at retirement. Participants will be able to track the growth of their future income on an online dashboard. They can also drop out of the program at any time.  

The other soon-to-be-formally-announced in-plan annuity product, discussed informally during networking breaks at the RIIA conference, was a UBS program that has been quietly but not secretly brewing for some time. It appears to be based on pure longevity insurance.

According to Drew Carrington, a UBS Wealth Management managing director and head of DC and retirement solutions, participants will be able to contribute to a contract that provides income when and if the participant reaches his or her mid-80s. Neither Deming nor Carrington named specific life insurance partners for their programs.

Cast party

This year’s spring conference may have been RIIA’s most substantive, timely and productive to date. An assiduous work in progress by Francois Gadenne and many others for more than half a decade, the organization survived the financial crisis, grew by 50% from 2010 to 2011, Gadenne says, and now has several initiatives underway.

One of those initiatives involves classes, hosted variously by Boston University, Texas Tech, and Salem State University (in Massachusetts), that lead to a Retirement Management Analyst designation for advisors. Another involves the launch of a Market Insight group to collect data on the retirement income market.

A third initiative has led to the creation of a periodical, Retirement Management Journal, to publish retirement income research and burnish a reputation for thought-leadership. Simultaneously, RIIA has established alliances and partnerships with organizations as varied as the National Association of Fixed Annuities (NAFA), the Depositary Trust & Clearing Corp. (DTCC) and the Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association (DCIIA).

The depth of financial backing for an organization is hard to guage, but RIIA’s corporate sponsorship appears to be growing. Ibbotson (a Morningstar company), Allianz Global Investors, Dimensional Fund Advisors, Guided Choice, New York Life, DST Systems, Putnam Investments, and Wells Fargo were listed in the conference program as significant event sponsors.

It’s challenge, but it also feels necessary, to describe the difference between the RIIA conference and other retirement industry conferences. The difference springs primarily from the fact that unlike, say, Insured Retirement Institute or the Financial Planning Association, RIIA represents no single product category or distribution channel, but many of them at once.    

RIIA conferences are more eclectic and less parochial than others, as its motto—“the view across the silos”—would suggest. To be more precise: a more networking-driven mix of executives and entrepreneurs, political mavericks, and compulsive students-of-the-income-game can’t be found at any other conference in this space.  

That mixture generates a difference in vibe—a difference that’s difficult to define but essential to an understanding of the organization’s value. At the risk of exaggerating to make a point, RIIA’s conference differs from others in the way that a cast party differs from a stage play: same players, with their masks off.  

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.  

Don’t Cut Pensions, Expand Them

On March 15, the New York State Legislature agreed to a deal limiting pensions for future public employees. The state thus joins 43 others that have recently enacted legislation curtailing public retirement benefits.

Though New York needs to reduce its spending, the cuts come at a particularly bad time: over a third of New York workers, both public and private, approaching retirement age have have less than $10,000 in liquid assets. As a result, those workers are projected to be poor or near poor in retirement, with an average budget of about $7 a day for food and approximately $600 a month for housing.

Fortunately, there’s an easy solution. Rather than curtailing public and private pensions, New York and other states could save millions of workers from impending poverty by creating public pensions for everyone.

While the recession bears some blame for the looming retirement crisis, experts agree that the primary cause is more fundamental: Most workers do not have retirement accounts at work. Over half of the workers in New York State, more than four million people in 2010, do not participate in retirement plans with their current employers, while over half of American workers do not have pension plans at work.

Private-sector pensions have been on the retreat for decades. In fact, in the late 1970s and early ’80s, Congress, worried about the dismal rate of pension coverage, tried to remedy the situation by extending 401(k) plans, originally designed for executives, to everyone, while also passing a law to create individual retirement accounts.   

The problem is that these steps set up incentives through the tax code, which means that the biggest benefits go to the highest earners — people who, moreover, would probably have saved anyway. Today 79 percent of such tax breaks go to the top 20 percent of workers.

Meanwhile, despite extensive commercial advertising for retirement planning, coverage for ordinary people stalled. And even many of those who do save for retirement fail to consistently put away the 5 to 10 percent of their pay necessary to adequately supplement their Social Security benefits.

In response, in late February California State Senator Kevin De León and Darrell Steinberg, the Senate president pro tempore, introduced legislation that would allow private-sector workers in California to enroll in a modest, state-operated retirement program financed by the workers and their employers — at virtually no cost to taxpayers.

This would increase coverage because employers would put every worker into a plan, either their own or the California plan. In the California version workers could opt out; some will, but most workers once in a plan will stay in.

Also in February, John Liu, the New York City comptroller, called for a similar plan for New York City residents. His program would pool employee and employer contributions into a professionally managed, citywide retirement fund.

Both plans would use the same professional staff and institutional money managers that invest the state and city pension funds to manage contributions made by participating employers and employees in the private sector.

This is a vital step: public pension plans usually outperform 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts, because instead of a single worker managing a single account, large institutional plans pool workers of all ages, diversify the portfolio over longer time periods, use the best professional managers that aren’t available for retail accounts and have the bargaining power to lower fees and prioritize long-term investment.

By some estimates, costs for public pensions are over 45 percent lower than for individual 401(k) plans. Of course, since these plans would be financed by workers and their employers, there would be no cost to taxpayers.

Saving for retirement is never easy. But finding a safe place to put your money these days is even harder. Opening up public pension options to everyone is a cheap, simple way to help.

Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor of economics at the New School, is the author of When I’m Sixty-Four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them (Princeton University Press, 2008).

© 2012 The New York Times. Reprinted by permission

The Weird Math of Charitable Gift Annuities

Anyone who has studied the “annuity puzzle” has heard the assertion, frequently attributed to Menahem Yaari’s famous 1965 paper on the subject, that a retiree with no bequest motive should annuitize all of his or her assets.

But Yaari’s rule-of-thumb appears to ignore the existence of charitable gift annuities (CGA), which allow philanthropic, often high-net-worth retirees to meet their need for lifetime income and their desire to donate money to charity in a single contract.

Charities use CGAs as fund-raising tools. Acting like an insurance company that issues life annuities, a charity will collect a purchase premium, pay out a lifetime income to one or two people, and keep what’s left when they die—either to pay surviving annuitants or as revenue.

CGAs differ from commercial annuities in a few significant ways. All else being equal, purchasers of CGA receive a lower payout rate than purchasers of commercial annuities. But, because their premium doubles as a gift, they receive a current-year tax deduction worth between, say, 10% and 40% of value of the initial premium.

In short, there’s a trade-off. The reduced payout rate increases the chance that a chunk of money (technically, the “residuum”) will be left over for the charitable organization when the annuitants have died. The donor’s current-year tax deduction is the present value of that future chunk of money, discounted at a rate dictated by the IRS.

Standardized (but not mandatory) CGA payout rates have been established by the American Council on Gift Annuities. The suggested rate for a single 65-year-old is 4.7% (as of January 1, 2012)—as compared with almost 7% from an insurance company. Payout rates vary from charity to charity, however, as a couple of examples will show. (And, of course, the tax benefit will depend on each taxpayer’s situation.)

Alan and Connie

An online hunt for information about CGAs led me to Futurefocus.net, one of whose pages provided the hypothetical example of “Alan” and “Connie,” ages 74 and 76, respectively. The imaginary couple decided to take $100,000 out of a taxable money market fund yielding only $1,500 a year and purchase a CGA from XYZ Charity.

The CGA paid them $5,000 a year (or 5%, the ACGA rate) as long as either lived. It also gave them a current-year tax deduction of $34,752 (the present value of the future charitable contribution). Because the Richards are in the 35% marginal tax bracket, they reduced their tax bill by $12,163.

In addition to the current-year tax deduction, the Richards could look forward to excluding $3,980 (representing return of principal) of each year’s $5,000 payout from income taxes for 16.4 years. According to the example (whose calculations I was not able to test), the Richards would have to generate $8,100 a year in earned income to replace the income from the CGA.

The real world of CGAs, it turns out, offers more price flexibility than Alan and Connie’s story would imply. For example, the UJA Federation of New York recently advertised a CGA in the New York Times that offered a much higher payout rate but a smaller deduction than in the hypothetical above.

Using the calculator on the UJA’s website, I typed in Alan and Connie’s ages and premium amount. The UJA, it turned out, would pay $6,500 a year or 6.5% to the Richards—30% more per year than XYZ charity. The higher payout meant that less would be left for the UJA when the Richards died, so the Richards received a tax deduction of only $13,789. Assuming a 35% marginal tax rate, they would save just $4,826.   

Why the difference in payout rates and deductions? According to Dick Kellogg of FutureFocus.net, which produced the XYZ hypothetical, some non-profit organizations choose to compete for contributions by advertising higher rates than those suggested by the ACGA. They hope to recoup in volume what they sacrifice on each sale. (That practice is a bit frowned on, Kellogg said. The ACGA created a standardized rate to encourage charities not to compete on rates.)

A higher rate may simply act as a teaser rather than a final offer. William Samers, vice president of Planned Giving and Endowments at UJA Federation of New York, explained that donors can choose, within limits, any blend of payout and deduction that meets their needs or preferences. “I assume they could do that with any charity,” he said.

But, as a rule, only a charity with deep reserves is in a position to offer a higher rate, Samers added. With $30 million in its pool, $23 million in liabilities, plus an unrestricted endowment to draw on, UJA Federation of New York feels comfortable doing it. “If everybody lived to 120, we could still make all our payments,” he said.

‘Not 100% rational’

Actuaries may be interested to know the assumptions behind the ACGA’s standardized payout rates. For instance, the rates are targeted toward a future charitable contribution of 50% of the initial premium, with a minimum present value equal to 20% of the initial premium. All annuitants are assumed to be female and one year younger than their actual ages.

The payout rates assume a 4.25% investment return—a decline of 75 basis points from last July. The assumed expense ratio is 1%. The current-year charitable deduction, however, is based on an IRS-prescribed discount rate, currently only 1.5%. The charities anticipate their funds to average an annual net gain of 3.25%, but the IRS isn’t as optimistic (or as generous).   

Of course, prospective donors could always buy a $75,000 commercial annuity and give $25,000 to charity, rather than make the charity wait for them to die. “It’s not 100% rational decision-making,” Samers said. CGA buyers—who likely comprise a separate, wealthier client segment from commercial annuity buyers—may just relish the idea of keeping their money away from both insurers and the IRS. 

Is it risky to purchase a CGA? The gift annuity guarantee is based on the claims-paying ability of the charity, and charities fail more easily than insurance companies. Some charities have reportedly purchased commercial annuities as a safeguard. During the financial crisis, many small or shallow-pocketed charitable funds were said to be “underwater,” and a few actually went bankrupt. Before relying on a charity for lifetime income, do your due-diligence.

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Fidelity identifies a group of older clients averaging $360k in retirement accounts

Investors with both 401(k) plans and IRAs have a combined average balance of $212,600, and members of that group on the verge of or in retirement – between 65 and 69 – have a combined average balance of $359,000, according to Fidelity Investments. 

Fidelity reviewed users of one or both types of retirement accounts within its customer base, and came up with average balances for several distinct subsets of that population. The data can be found in the table below.  

 

Average annual contribution, all ages

Average annual contribution: ages 65-69

Average balance, all ages

Average balance, ages 65-69

401(k) only

$5,750

$7,810

$69,100

$123,400

IRA only

$4,150

$4,910

$71,700

$133,500

Both 401(k) and IRA

$10,300

$11,040

$212,600

$359,000

Few active managers beat indices: S&P

Findings released today by S&P Indices for its full year “2011 S&P Indices Versus Active Funds Scorecard” (SPIVA) show that approximately 84% of actively managed U.S. equity funds underperformed their relative S&P benchmark in 2011. Over the previous three-and five-year periods, approximately 56% and 61% of actively manage equity funds underperformed their benchmark.

Bear markets should favor active managers. Instead of being 100% invested in a market that is turning south, active managers have the opportunity to move to cash, or seek more defensive positions. Unfortunately, that opportunity does not translate to reality. In the two true bear markets the SPIVA Scorecard has tracked over the last decade, most active equity managers failed to beat their benchmarks.

SPIVA reports on the performance of actively managed U.S. funds corrected for survivorship bias and shows equal and asset-weighted averages. The complete SPIVA scorecards for the U.S., Australia, Canada and India is available at www.spindices.com/spivaresearch .

Drilling down to style categories, the SPIVA scorecard shows that approximately 69% of large cap funds, 70% of mid cap funds and 51% small cap funds failed to beat the S&P 500, S&P MidCap 400 and S&P SmallCap 600 respectively over the previous three years. The results are similar over the five-year period and more dramatic over the one-year period for 2011. 

A table showing the percentage of U.S. equity funds outperformed by their benchmarks can be found on the RIJ homepage, March 14 issue.

The script was similar for non-U.S. equity funds, with indices outperforming a majority of actively managed non-U.S. equity funds over the past three- and five-years with approximately 69% and 55% of global equity funds failing to outperform the S&P Global 1200.

While the active versus passive debate gets less play for bond market funds, S&P Indices has seen similar results over five-year horizons in this asset class. In most bond fund categories, benchmark indices have outperformed a majority of active managers.


The Bucket

New Athene fixed annuity issued   

ATHENE MaxRate is a multi-year guarantee annuity with a choice of five or seven-year guarantee periods. Seven-year guaranteed rates are currently 4.15% in the first year and 3.15% in years 2-7; for five years, the rates are 3.85% in year one and 2.85% in years 2-5.

The new product provides a 30-day window at the end of each guarantee period during which contract holders can request a partial withdrawal, surrender their annuity, or convert it into a guaranteed stream of income without incurring a market value adjustment or any withdrawal charges.

If no action is taken during the 30-day window, the annuity will automatically begin a new guarantee period of the same duration with a new guaranteed interest rate.

Most younger investors not confident about retirement:  T. Rowe Price  

Only 39% of investors between the ages of 21-50 are confident that they will have enough money for retirement, according to new study from T. Rowe Price.  

Most younger investors (63%) have no detailed plan for their finances in retirement., but of those who have a detailed plan, 58% believe they will have enough money for retirement, a survey showed.

The study was conducted online in December 2011 by Harris Interactive on behalf of T. Rowe Price among 860 adults aged 21-50 who have at least one investment account. The survey also showed:

  • 77% of those who have a plan said that it targets an anticipated monthly budget. 84% cited having a specific monthly withdrawal strategy.
  • 78% said their plan considers life expectancy and how long their savings might need to last.
  • 74% of Gen X and Y expect to receive retirement income from  401(k)s or other workplace retirement plans.
  • 65% expect to receive retirement income from IRAs.
  • 64% expect income from non-retirement accounts (checking, savings, stocks, bonds, mutual funds).
  • 63% of investors aged 50 and under anticipate receiving Social Security. 

When asked at what age they expect to retire, the mean age investors gave was 62.  When asked how many years they expect to live in retirement, the mean answer was 22 years. 

Prudential Retirement calls for MEPs for small employers

Prudential Retirement’s Jamie Kalamarides, senior vice president of Institutional Investment Products, testified last week during a U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging hearing on the shortage of retirement savings plans among small businesses.

Kalamarides discussed Prudential Retirement’s support for expanding retirement coverage through multiple small employer plans, which would allow groups of employers to pool resources under a single defined contribution plan, resulting in lower costs and simplified administrative requirements.  

Compliance with ERISA’s reporting, disclosure and fiduciary requirements may be a concern for many small employers and, the ability to reallocate these responsibilities to professionals through a multiple employer plan would remove a major impediment to small employers extending retirement savings opportunities to their employees.

If multiple employer plans are to play a meaningful role in closing the “retirement coverage gap” clarifications and changes in the law are necessary, including expanding multiple employer plan sponsorship, reallocating fiduciary and plan administration responsibilities and eliminating non–discrimination testing, Kalamarides said.   


Jackson reports record net income of $683m in 2011

Jackson National Life Insurance said it earned a record $683 million during 2011, up 34% over 2010. Jackson has generated more than a half-billion dollars in IFRS net income in seven out of the past eight years.

An indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Britain’s Prudential plc, Jackson generated a record $22.9 billion in total sales and deposits, up 16% over 2010. Retail net flows also increased 11% over 2010 to a record $13.6 billion.

The record sales and net flows were driven primarily by growth in variable annuity (VA) sales at Jackson and deposits at Jackson’s retail asset management subsidiary Curian Capital, LLC. VA sales rose 19% to $17.5 billion, while Curian deposits increased 28% to $2.7 billion.

Jackson’s total IFRS assets increased to $120.2 billion at the end of 2011, up from $107.0 billion at the end of 2010. At December 31, 2011, Jackson had $3.9 billion of regulatory adjusted capital, more than eight times the regulatory requirement after remitting a dividend of $530 million to its parent.

Curian generated $10 million in IFRS pretax operating income during 2011, up from $2 million during 2010. As of December 31, 2011, Curian’s assets under management totaled $7.3 billion, up 32% from the end of 2010.

Consumer demand for fixed annuities fell during 2011 due to the low interest rate environment. During 2011, Jackson sold $1.5 billion in fixed index annuities, compared to $1.7 billion in 2010. Sales of traditional deferred fixed annuities totaled $756 million during 2011, compared to $1.3 billion during the prior year. Jackson took advantage of the availability of wider spreads during 2011 by issuing $382 million in institutional products, a market in which the company participates on an opportunistic basis.

As of February 29, 2012, Jackson had the following ratings:

  • A+ (superior) A.M. Best financial strength rating, the second-highest of 16 rating categories
  • AA (very strong) Standard & Poor’s insurer financial strength rating, the third-highest of 21 rating categories
  • AA (very strong) Fitch Ratings insurer financial strength rating, the third-highest of 24 rating categories
  • A1 (good) Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. insurance financial strength rating, the fifth-highest of 21 rating categories

Jackson ranked third in both total annuity and VA sales, and second in VA net flows during the first nine months of 2011. The company achieved the following rankings and market share:

  • Third in total annuity sales with a market share of 8.4% percent.
  • Third in variable annuity sales with a market share of 11.8% percent.
  • Ninth in fixed index annuity sales with a market share of 4.6%.
  • 14th in traditional deferred fixed annuity sales with a market share of 1.9%.

Jackson’s affiliate, National Planning Holdings, Inc. , a network of four independent broker-dealers had IFRS revenue of $788 million in 2011, up 14% over 2010, and IFRS pretax operating income of $22 million, up 32% over 2010. The network reported record gross product sales of $16.3 billion in 2011, an increase of 14% over the prior year.

 

Record sales for income, indexed annuities in Q4 2011: Beacon

 Despite a difficult interest rate environment, income annuity sales grew almost 18% in fourth quarter and nearly 7% in 2011, according to estimates from the Beacon Research Fixed Annuity Premium Study. This growth gave them a record-high 13% of fourth quarter’s sales. Indexed annuity results held their own, claiming a 48% share of the quarter’s sales – also a record high.

“Income annuities did remarkably well, considering that lower interest rates and a flatter yield curve reduced payouts,” said Jeremy Alexander, CEO of Beacon Research.  “Income annuities generally provide the most retirement income bang for the buck. Sales results indicate that advisors and their clients are becoming aware of how these products can be used to create a personal pension. Similarly, guaranteed lifetime income benefits helped sustain indexed annuity sales despite lower cap or participation rates.”

Total annual fixed annuity sales were resilient during the difficult conditions of 2011, falling just 1.1% to $75.6 billion. Income annuity results advanced 6.6% to $8.5 billion. Indexed annuities did about the same at approximately $33 billion. Fixed rate non-MVA annuity sales of $28.1 billion and MVA sales of about $6 billion were down 3.1% and 5.5%, respectively.

Fourth quarter’s fixed annuity sales also held up surprisingly well on a period-to-period basis, declining only 1.7% to $17.3 billion.  At $2.2 billion, income annuities were up 17.6%.  Indexed annuity and fixed rate MVA results were essentially flat at $8.4 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively.  Fixed rate non-MVA sales decreased 10.3% to $5.4 billion. Overall sales fell 8.8% from third quarter, with weaker results for all product types.

Estimated Sales by Product Type (in $ millions)

 

Total

Fixed Rate

Non-MVA

Fixed Rate

MVA

Indexed

Income

2011

75,570

28,117

5,996

32,978

8,481

2010

76,400

29,017

6,348

33,080

7,958

% change

-1.1%

-3.1%

-5.5%

-0.3%

6.6%

Q4 ‘11

17,330

5,409

1,346

8,352

2,221

Q4 ‘10

17,620

6,026

1,358

8,351

1,889

% change

-1.7%

-10.3%

-0.9%

0.0%

17.6%

Q4 ‘11

17,330

5,409

1,346

8,352

2,221

Q3 ‘11

19,000

6,627

1,460

8,690

2,226

% change

-8.8%

-18.4%

-7.8%

-3.9%

-0.2%

Three of fourth quarter’s top five companies changed position from the prior quarter. American Equity and Aviva moved up a notch to come in second and third, respectively. Western National moved to fourth place. Allianz and New York Life remained in first and fifth place, respectively. Fourth quarter results for the top five Study participants were as follows:

 Total Fixed Annuity Sales (in thousands)

Allianz Life                                                              1,491,418

American Equity                                                    1,372,103                                               

Aviva USA                                                               1,233,303

Western National Life                                          1,118,218          

New York Life                                                            923,031

New York Life was the new MVA sales leader, and continued as the dominant income annuity issuer. The other top companies in sales by product type were unchanged from the prior quarter: indexed – Allianz, and fixed rate non-MVA – Western National.

In sales by distribution channel, Jackson National was the new leader among independent broker-dealers, and Nationwide took the lead in wirehouses. The other distribution channel leaders were unchanged. Western National was the dominant bank channel carrier. New York Life led in captive agent and large/regional broker-dealer sales. USAA was the direct/third party channel leader. Allianz posted top independent producer sales.

Fourth quarter’s top five products and their rankings were unchanged from the prior quarter. All were indexed annuities except for New York Life’s Lifetime Income Annuity, which remained in second place. The Study tracks the sales of some 600 fixed annuities, and the top five products were: 

Rank   Company Name                                 Product Name                                                  Product Type

1            Allianz Life                                                MasterDex X                                                            Indexed

2            New York Life                                          NYL Lifetime Income Annuity                              Income           

3            American Equity                                     Retirement Gold                                                       Indexed                                   

4            American Equity                                     Bonus Gold                                                                Indexed

5            Aviva                                                          Balanced Allocation Annuity 12                            Indexed

 

“As we expected, seasonality and the worsening interest rate environment drove a sequential drop in fourth quarter’s results,” Alexander said. “Fixed annuity sales typically fall to a certain level when the rate environment is unfavorable and remain there until rates and the yield curve improve.  Fourth quarter may prove to be the period when results bottomed out.”

Getting into the Heads of RIAs

Registered investment advisors, whether individual money managers or large wealth management firms, are an important market for purveyors of retirement income products. (See today’s RIJ cover story, “Will RIAs Sing This ARIA?”) 

RIAs sit higher on the financial food chain than other intermediaries, in a sense. They tend to manage larger chunks of money and bear more fiduciary responsibility than brokers and insurance agents. And, since the financial crisis, they’ve become the fastest-growing financial distribution channel. 

Some of the freshest data on RIA practices, especially with respect to retirement income, comes from Trends in Advisor Delivery of Retirement Income – 2012, a report published in February by two Massachusetts firms, Practical Perspectives and GDC Research.

Here are some the findings, based on a surveys of and interviews with all types of financial advisors, of their 150-page proprietary report:

  • RIAs are the most likely to serve clients with the highest average assets, followed by wirehouse brokers. Independent and regional broker-dealer reps and insurance advisors tend to serve the mass-affluent.  
  • In part because they tend to have older clients, RIAs (and wirehouse brokers) tend to be more likely to support a higher proportion of retirement income clients. Over 40% of RIAs and more than one-third of wirehouse advisors are classified as fully engaged by the Retirement Income Client Quotient (A scale of created by the researchers).  
  • RIAs have the highest concentration of retirement income assets managed; insurance advisors have the lowest. This likely reflects the broader wealth management orientation of RIAs and the more transactional value proposition of insurance representatives.
  • 57% of RIAs manage $750 million to $5 million, compared to 33% for wirehouse advisors, 24% for bank advisors, 7% for advisors at regional and independent broker-dealers, and 4% among insurance agents. Overall, most advisors (59%) manage between $250,000 and $750,000.
  • Fewer than half of RIAs report growth in the number of retirement income clients served, perhaps because of the more mature nature of the RIA practices and the older clients they serve.
  • RIAs by definition favor fee-based only compensation, with almost 90% solely or primarily fee-based. But 30% of RIAs say they use planning fees regularly, 10% use hourly fees, 13% use retainers.
  • More than half of advisors except RIAs view “enhancing retirement income processes and capabilities” as a high priority. Only four in 10 RIAs describe that as a high priority.
  • Independent advisors and RIAs are by far more likely than others to provide assistance with developing a retirement income strategy and with educating clients on issues related to retirement. This may reflect the more holistic orientation of these advisors.
  • RIAs are the only channel to have little interest in increased use of variable annuities.

Trends in Advisor Delivery of Retirement Income – 2012 is the latest in a series of research studies on advisors and retirement income practices co-published by GDC Research and Practical Perspectives since 2008. Their work shows that advisors are gradually moving beyond the systematic withdrawal approach to decumulation.

“There’s been a gradual migration away from the total return approach, which is just a continuation of the accumulation approach into retirement,” Howard Schneider, president of Practical Perspectives, told RIJ.

“For most advisors, a 4% to 5% return is still the target, but they’re discovering that the total return approach is unpredictable. S more are using a time-segmented or, increasingly, an income-floor approach. It’s not a sea-change in attitudes; it’s not as if the numbers using total return have shrunk a lot. But the advisor market has divided into a third, a third, and a third, where in the past the percentage using just total return was in the mid- to upper-40%,” he said.

“Investment management is still the core function in client-advisor relationships. With high net worth clients, advisors are the quarterback, and will talk to them about a variety of topics. With the smaller clients, they can’t afford to do that. They tend not to be as hands-on and they focus more on investment management.”

To some extent, advisors are waiting to see what their peers do about retirement income.

“Advisors are facing a confidence dilemma,” Schneider said. “On the one hand, they say they’re confident that their clients will achieve their retirement goals. At the same time, they say, ‘I’m open to other ideas. Tell me more about what other advisors are doing.’ They want validation that they’re doing the right thing.”

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Politicized Economist

Larry Kotlikoff, Ph.D., the Boston University economist, prolific author, creator of retirement planning software and proponent of “consumption smoothing” over the life cycle, is taking time out from his hectic schedule to run for president. Of the United States.

In a phone interview this week, Kotlikoff conceded that his campaign is a bit untraditional. You won’t find him trying to milk donations from investment bankers, for instance, or consuming corndogs at county fairs in the Midwest, or repeating the same stump speech in an endless series of town meetings.

Larry Kotlikoff

Instead, Kotlikoff (right) has thrown his hat into a virtual ring set up by Americans Elect 2012, an organization and a  website where voters who feel disenfranchised can either register support for a candidate, draft a candidate or even declare their own candidacy. as Kotlikoff has done the latter. And if he and running mate, Adm. (ret.) William Owens, a former commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet, attract 50,000 support clicks by mid-May, they’ll qualify for the Americans Elect “primaries.”

As of Monday night, his 300 clicks put him in second place among declared candidates behind former Louisiana governor Buddy Roemer, who has 1,084, and far behind the leading draft candidate, Ron Paul, who has 4,215. The two highest click-getters in the primaries will clash in a run-off to determine the Americans Elect presidential candidate, who will appear on ballots in all 50 states next November.

The ‘purple’ plan

Readers of Kotlikoff’s books will already be familiar with his platform. “The country is being driven broke by the two major political parties,” Kotlikoff told RIJ this week. “We’re in worse fiscal shape than any other developed country. We have 78 million Baby Boomers who will be receiving about $40,000 each in Social Security and Medicare benefits. Our kids can’t afford it. We have to fix these institutions before they do us in.”

Regarding his political hue, “I put myself in the middle. Purple,” he said. I’m independent. Fiscally, I view the country’s problems as economic engineering problems. I’m an economist, someone who sees problems and wonders how to fix them at least cost.”

Kotlikoff has articulated his fixes in a series of books published over the past two decades (often with co-author Scott Burns). They include (The Healthcare Fix, The Coming Generational Storm, Spend Til’ the End, Jimmy Stewart Is Dead, and, most recently, The Clash of Generations {MIT Press, 2012). He has highly specific ideas for overhauling Social Security, Medicare, and the U.S. tax code. 

Here’s how Kotlikoff described his plan Social Security to RIJ:

“Social Security is 29% underfunded. It needs cuts in benefits or an increase in taxes. I would freeze the existing system—put zeros in everyone’s earnings records from the date of reform on. Then I would put everyone in personal security accounts. Everybody would contribute 8% of his or her pay to a personal account. Your household’s contribution would be split between you and your spouse. The government would make matching contributions on behalf of the poor. The money would be collectively invested in a global market-weighted index fund managed by a computer. The government would guarantee the account balance at retirement—setting a floor of zero return. The same computer would, on a cohort-by-cohort basis, gradually sell off the account balances and give people an inflation-protected annuity, beginning at age 62.”

On Medicare, Kotlikoff says that his ideas resemble Paul Ryan (R-Wis), although he claims that Ryan borrowed his ideas from Kotlikoff and from John Goodman of The National Center for Policy Analysis. He like vouchers:

“Individual, risk-adjusted vouchers make a lot of sense. Who gets the biggest vouchers? The poor and the elderly. So even though it’s an idea that comes from the far right, it’s a very progressive proposal. Every American would get a voucher once a year. In return, they could buy a basic health care plan from an insurance company. All of the insurers would offer the exact same plan.

It’s a ‘purple’ health care plan that will cost 10% of GDP, not 23%. The country won’t go broke over it, and it will give everybody a good basic plan. If someone wants to pay extra for insurance that will cover angioplasties when he’s 98, he can. It’s not health care savings accounts. HSAs are about getting people to save. I want them to buy insurance.”

To fund these new plans, Kotlikoff prescribes tax reform. He would substitute a consumption tax for personal and corporate income taxes:   

“I would get rid of the income tax, the corporate tax and the estate and gift taxes. In their place, I would make the payroll tax highly progressive. I would cut the employee’s contribution to the payroll tax to zero on first $40,000 of income. I would take the FICA ceiling off and make all earnings subject to the payroll tax. Even though Social Security would be retired, I would keep the payroll tax in place—to produce general revenues and to pay for health care vouchers and accrued Social Security benefits.

Then I would implement a progressive consumption tax and a progressive inheritance tax with a 15% ceiling on each. [15% of every $100 spent, or 17.5% of consumption ($15 equals 17.5% of $100-$85)] In return, each household would receive a Demogrant—a grant to each household that would give poor people enough to cover their consumption tax payments. On net, the poor would pay no consumption tax. At the same, time, a 15% inheritance tax would be applied to all estates over $1 million.

The debt monster

America’s growing debt is what keeps Kotlikoff up at night (and churning out books). Our national debt of $15 trillion is mere pocket change, he says. He worries more about the gap, by his calculation, of over $200 trillion between the present value of the federal government’s expected revenues and the present value of its legal commitments to its citizens.

To fund that gap and set the government on a path to solvency, he writes in The Clash of Generations (MIT Press, 2012), the government would have to raise taxes by 64% next year and keep taxes at that high level indefinitely. That prospect makes for a scary future, and a sense of extreme present danger.

I know too little about politics or economics to say how feasible or effective Kotlikoff’s proposals might be. I agree with him that Americans need to save more, that health insurance makes more sense than health savings accounts, that banks shouldn’t be allowed to gamble with insured money, as he argues in his 2010 book, Jimmy Stewart is Dead. I don’t know enough about tax policy to comment on his consumption tax idea.

Although I don’t necessarily share Kotlikoff’s inclination to catastrophize our fiscal dilemma—it can lead to panic and give ammunition to people who oppose all public institutions—his sense of urgency is clearly justified. If by chance he doesn’t capture the White House in November, I hope the next president asks for his advice.    

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Will RIAs Sing This ARIA?

When Charles Schwab & Co. decided to look at the feasibility of wrapping lifetime income guarantees around mutual fund and ETF accounts a few years ago, it tapped its chief legal counsel for insurance, David Stone, to co-lead the evaluation effort.  

Schwab’s executives eventually decided to pass on the idea, but Stone didn’t let it go. He saw a huge opportunity in offering living benefits to the registered investment advisors who manage big custodial accounts, and he had a high-tech plan for seizing it.    

So Stone, 53, left Schwab in late 2008 and, with former Schwab technology guru R. Scott Strait and two others, started ARIA Retirement Solutions in early 2009. (ARIA denotes “Access to RIAs”.)  The San Francisco-based start-up, bankrolled since January by Polaris Ventures, sells a no-load stand-alone living benefit (SALB) to RIAs called RetireOne.

David Stone

“We said, ‘Let’s build an income product that appeals to the $1.3 trillion in assets [at the big custodial firms] that don’t have annuity penetration, by eliminating all the reasons why RIAs won’t adopt them,” Stone (at right)  told RIJ in a recent interview.

Transamerica Advisors Life, a new entity organized specifically for this venture by AEGON/Transamerica, is thus far the only insurer writing guarantees for the product. (See prospectus.) But ARIA’s open-architecture hub is built to accommodate multiple insurers, as well as dozens of custodians and hundreds of potential investment options.   

ARIA itself doesn’t manage, insure or custody money. Instead, it’s a cloud-based technology platform whose servers connect RIAs, their clients, the custodians of their managed accounts, the insurers who write guarantees for ARIA, and a team of licensed agents that provides compliant services. It’s a formula that Stone and his backers believe will finally open the huge RIA market to income guarantees.

“You can view us as the hub,” Stone said. “We do the administration for the insurance company. We connect the insurance company, the advisor and the end client. The clients deal directly with ARIA in Louisville. There’s a friendly front-end for the advisor.

“We do the suitability determination, and provide feeds from the custodial firms to the insurance company,” he added. “Once the product is up, it’s going to be open architecture from an insurance point of view. Transamerica is just the first insurance company to participate.”  

“We’ve been watching the evolution of the SALB, and we felt that the independent RIA channel is an underserved market from a guarantee perspective,” said Anne Spaes, head of institutional relationships at Transamerica Advisor Life. Since the mid- 1990s, AEGON’s Monument Life unit has sold a no-load variable annuity to brokers and RIAs, called Advisor’s Edge. But Advisor’s Edge had—and still has—an M&E pricing structure, no income guarantee, and places the assets at the insurance company—none of which fit the RIA practice model.

SALBs: a brief history

RIAs, as a rule, avoid insurance products. They’re generally not insurance-licensed and only a small percentage of them take any commissions. Paid to assemble portfolios, they have little appetite for the portfolios that come bundled into VAs. But, as the advisor channel with the largest average balances, they’re too big a market for insurers to be left out of.   

So insurers created SALBs—living benefits that were unbundled from VA investment options. These stand-alone living benefits could be sold to RIAs, unified account (UMA) managers, and third-party asset-management programs (TAMPs), and wrapped around almost any moderate-risk taxable or tax-deferred portfolio.

Lockwood Management promoted the first official SALB in late 2007, with The Phoenix Companies providing the living benefit. In the post-crisis summer of 2009, Nationwide Financial and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney announced a partnership to wrap a living benefit around wirehouse portfolios. Introduced during tumultuous times, neither venture got far. 

A life insurer faces certain constraints when building a SALB. The investment options have to be tame enough and generic enough to be insurable at an acceptable price but exciting enough to interest investors. To hedge the investment properly, the insurer also needs to monitor them. That’s easy with a variable annuity because the investments live in the insurer’s subaccounts, but harder when the protected investments live at Schwab or Fidelity or TD Ameritrade (for example), as they do with a SALB.

Enter ARIA

ARIA’s RetireOne addresses those issues, but doesn’t conquer the laws of physics and finance while doing it. The annual expense of the guarantee (or certificate) starts at 1% of the account value for portfolios with no more than 50% equities and rises to 1.75% for portfolios that hit the limit of 80% equities. International exposure is limited to 25%, small/midcap to 10% and alternatives to 5%.

Big deposits earn fee discounts: the fees on a $2 million contract go as low as 85 basis points. On the other hand, clients who take advantage of quarterly high-water marks to step up their benefit base to the account value will have to pay more for the privilege. The maximum contract fee is 2.50%. 

As for approved investment options, the current batch includes over 140 funds and ETFs from families that RIAs like: American Funds, DFA, iShares, Pimco, Schwab, TIAA-CREF, Vanguard and other favorites. Stone expects a lot of RIAs to build new insured portfolios from these approved options at their custodian of choice, rather than try to put an income floor under an existing portfolio. 

But what’s novel about ARIA isn’t the pricing or the investments. It’s the technology that lets the insurance company watch the investments on any of 50 different custodians and hedge them as they fluctuate.

“ARIA’s technology allows us to receive files from the custodians so that we can monitor the positions as we would any of our variable annuity subaccounts, and to use our risk management protocols and hedge accordingly,” said Transamerica’s Spaes. “We can see the same type of data, as if it were on our own platform.”

A tri-fold market

That leaves the marketing strategy, and Stone seems to understand his target end-client.

 “There are three categories of people who might buy this product. There’s the person in his 50s who wants to insure his retirement savings until he gets to retirement. This product gives you sequence-of-returns protection while allowing you to grow your asset base,” Stone told RIJ in an interview last week.

 “Then there’s the person who buys it at 65 who wants to control his assets but still get guaranteed income,” he added. “Third, there’s the 55-year-olds who will buy it and hold it until they die. We expect 70% of our customers to buy the guarantee before reaching retirement age. We tell the advisor, once your client gets to retirement, you can recalculate. If the GLWB is in the money”—that is, if the benefit base is higher than the account value—“you keep the contract. If it’s not in the money, you reevaluate.”

The contract pays out 4% to 8% a year, depending on the age of client and the 10-year Treasury rate at first withdrawal. In a departure from the typical VA living benefit, ARIA’s payouts are based on two factors—the age of the client and the 10-year Treasury rate when guaranteed payments commence—instead of on the client’s age alone. Even after payments begin, the payout percentage can move up or down according to whether the 10-year Treasury rate shifts far enough up or down.   

In another departure from custom, ARIA assesses the insurance fee on the account value rather than the benefit base. Consulting actuary Tim Pfeifer, who represented ARIA in its collaboration with the actuaries at Transamerica Advisors Life, told RIJ that the initial insurance expense ratio for a 50% equity portfolio could have been about 15% lower if it were levied on the benefit base. But Stone believed that said that assessing the fee on the account balance would be cheaper for the client in the long run. And, since advisors are used to asset-based fees, he expected them to find that formula more palatable.   

Last January, ARIA received an undisclosed amount of funding from Polaris Ventures, a nationwide venture capital firm that “tends to invest in platforms,” said Alan Spoon, the Polaris general partner who is working with ARIA. “This couldn’t happen without real-time, cloud-based platform technology that can link the clients, the RIAs, the custodians and insurance companies. It would have been impossible a few years ago, because the insurance companies wouldn’t have been able to tweak its hedges on a daily basis,” Spoon told RIJ this week.

Polaris, which manages about $3.5 billion worth of institutional money in six venture funds, also has a stake in Focus Financial Partners, a New York-based wealth management platform that supports about two dozen RIAs that manage some $50 billion in assets.

It was partly because of Focus Financial’s enthusiasm for the Stone’s venture that made Polaris eager to invest in ARIA Retirement Solutions. “The Focus firms aren’t guaranteeing distribution,” said Spoon said Spoon, a former president of The Washington Post Company. “But when they put their hands up it told us that there was enthusiasm for this” in the marketplace.

“Ultimately,” he said, “ARIA is promising for macro reasons. If you look at the demographic factors, recent events in the financial markets, and the state of people’s personal balance sheets, there are a lot of forces moving in favor of this.”

Editors note: In an e-mail to RIJ, Nationwide Financial offered this statement about the status of its SALB program with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney:

“Our goal is to help advisors create lifetime income for their clients. We are committed to offering stand-alone living benefits. However, we have faced some challenges that have caused us to put our current SALB offerings temporarily on hold. The challenges include obtaining state approvals for large states, and technology integration. We plan to re-launch Select Retirement with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney once their platforms have been integrated. We remain committed to the SALB business, and continue to work on making it easier for firms to offer these benefits and on bringing new solutions to market.”

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Six Annuities for the Wealthy

Reviewing my 2012 editorial calendar recently, I saw that someone had penciled in “The Needs of the High Net Worth Investor” as the theme for March. But what can be said on the topic, with regard to annuities? The conventional wisdom is that the rich don’t need annuities.

I guess it depends in part on how you define “rich.” Warren Buffett and Michael Bloomberg may not need annuities. But if people earning $250,000 or more are rich and people with at least $100,000 in securities are “affluent,” the annuity market might be bigger than we thought.

The trouble here is with the careless use of the word “annuities,” a term so general that it merely creates confusion. If you ask more specifically, Are there certain types of annuities that can help the wealthy use their money more efficiently? then the answer has to be yes.

Certainly, rich people do buy annuities or should buy them or should at least know more about them.  

An 80-something retiree who sold his cardboard box factory for several million dollars recently put $2 million in a B-share variable annuity, on the supposition that he could get guaranteed growth. Months later, at a holiday gathering, he asked me if I thought he did the right thing. ‘That depends,’ I said. ‘Did your broker buy you a Mercedes?’ 

Another wealthy relative, a ‘millionaire next door,’ prefers to clip coupons in retirement rather than tour Bali or Machu Picchu because he’s hoarding his fortune against the possibility of huge nursing home expenses. There are annuities that could help him. 

But more to the point: there are at least six kinds of annuities that so-called HNW investors should know more about as they contemplate or enter retirement. Starting with today’s story on Jackson National Life’s new Elite Access variable annuity, we’ll be writing about these products this month.

Longevity insurance. Rich people tend to live longer and therefore have greater longevity risk. The cheapest way for them to mitigate longevity risk (and have more fun with their money in the meantime) is to buy longevity insurance, aka an advanced life deferred annuity.

Fixed annuity/Long-term care insurance hybrids. The open-ended cost of long-term care insurance is one of the biggest threats to the value of bequests. As noted above, many wealthy people self-insure against these costs rather than buy expensive LTCI. Thanks to a provision of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, a deferred fixed annuity/long-term care insurance hybrid can help the wealthy avoid that trap. Part of the interest earned by the fixed annuity funds the LTCI, which is relatively cheap because the annuity assets (acting as a big deductible) cover the first year or two of expenses.

Low-cost variable annuities with alternative investment options. Although many of the wealthy know little about alternative investments and avoid them, these relatively exotic investments are emerging as popular diversification tools because of their low correlation with stocks and bonds. But alternatives, such as actively managed tactical asset allocation funds, can be tax-efficient because of high portfolio turnover. Therefore it makes sense to own them inside a variable annuity.    

SPIAs—for tax-efficient income or to finance a tax-free bequest. In Wealth Secrets of the Affluent (Wiley, 2008), Christopher R. Jarvis and David B. Mandell urge the rich to explore the purchase of life annuities, either with after-tax money (to reap the tax benefit of the exclusive ratio) or with qualified money (to fund a life insurance policy for heirs).  

Charitable gift annuities.  This type of annuity allows a philanthropic HNW retiree to generate retirement income, save on taxes, and fund a charitable cause. In essence, the contract owner gives money to a charity, which pays the owner (and spouse, optionally) a lifetime income. The owner receives an immediate partial tax deduction for the amount that the charity is statistically likely to have left when the annuitants have died. According to a recent New York Times ad, the effective annual rate of return on such a contract, including tax savings, ranges from 6.3% for a 65-year-old single-life purchaser to 11.5% for a 90-year-old single-life purchaser.

Secondary-market annuities. Everyone, including the wealthy, is looking for better returns from low-risk investments today, and some secondary-market period certain deferred payout annuities offer an effective rate of return of seven percent or more. Sure, it’s a walk on the wild side, but some HNW investors are ready to take that risk. Just make sure that you’re working with a trustworthy intermediary who can demonstrate that you will have unequivocal rights to the income.    

 *        *        *

It’s likely that many HNW investors never even hear about these tools because they get their financial guidance from fee-based investment advisors who know nothing about annuities or regard them as “terrible investments.” Few advisors understand both investment and insurance products well and, more importantly, know how to combine them to generate maximum savings, utility and risk-reduction for their retired clients. As more financial advisors learn that a grasp of annuities can help them compete for HNW retired clients, that situation may change.       

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. 

 

Schwab supports DTCC’s service for custody of alternatives

Following a recent No-Action letter obtained from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Charles Schwab has announced its support for The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation’s (DTCC’s) Alternative Investment Products service (AIP) as a means to facilitate the custody of alternative investments.

AIP is a service offering of National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC), a subsidiary of DTCC. The letter Schwab obtained from the SEC confirmed that broker-dealers can rely on AIP to establish compliance with a broker’s possession and control requirements.

 “Alternative investments are an increasingly important asset class for the industry, including many of the 7,000 independent investment advisor firms that we serve at Schwab,” said Bernie Clark, executive vice president of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc and leader of the Schwab Advisor Services division.

“We have been advocating for an industry-wide solution to create greater standardization in trading and custody. We believe that AIP has the potential to transform the industry’s approach to alternative investments.”

AIP is a data transmission platform that links administrators, broker/dealers, custodians, and issuers of alternative investments to provide streamlined processing of pooled investments like hedge funds, funds-of-funds, REITs, and limited partnerships. By automating this process, AIP can reduce errors, lower costs, and reduce the time it takes to process account information, which benefits advisors, investors, issuers, and custodians like Schwab.

“AIP is designed to provide the alternative investment industry with the same type of efficiency and scalability that exists in the mutual fund industry,” said Schwab executive vice president Bernie Clark. “But success requires participation by alternative investment issuers. We have been working to drive issuer adoption of AIP, and we’ll be stepping up those efforts in the coming weeks and months.”

In order to educate independent investment advisors about AIP and how it will impact Schwab’s custody of alternative assets, the firm is hosting an educational webcast in April with representatives of Schwab and DTCC. More information about the webcast will be available in the coming weeks.

Alternatives Move to Center Stage

In deciding to make alternative investments the chief attraction of its new Elite Access variable annuity, Jackson National Life acknowledged the growing interest in and use of alternatives among investment advisors.

“Alternatives” are investments that involve assets or strategies other than simply buying and holding stocks, bonds, or cash. Commodities such as oil or metals are alternative investments. So are “long/short” funds, “tactical asset management” funds, and “managed futures” funds.

The prices of alternatives characteristically do not move in the same directions as the prices of stocks and bonds. As a result, they potentially enhance portfolio diversification, reduce volatility and improve long-term returns.             

Last September, just after a month of extreme stock market volatility, Jefferson National Life sponsored a survey of some 500 registered investment advisors (RIAs) and fee-based advisors about their use of alternative investments. Jefferson National sells a no-load, flat insurance fee variable annuity, Monument Advisor, that offers exposure to funds that are classified as alternative investments by Morningstar.

Although the fee-based advisors who responded to the survey aren’t the target market for Jackson National’s new annuity, their opinions can be assumed to reflect the growing interest in alternatives across the advisor market.

The survey showed that, over the next five years, 55% of advisors see their allocation to alternative investments increasing “moderately” and 11.1% see it increasing “substantially.” About six in 10 believe that alternatives will become even more important than traditional investments in the future.  

 “Addressing portfolio correlations” was the reason most frequently cited for using alternatives, selected by 61.3% of advisors. “Filling portfolio allocations” was selected by 52% of advisors and “absolute returns” was selected by 48.6%. Advisors now consider alternatives “critical for true diversification and essential for producing a positive return regardless of the direction and fluctuations of the markets,” Jefferson National concluded in its report on the survey.

Roughly three-fourths of advisors surveyed said they have 10% or more of their clients’ portfolios allocated to global or international securities. Similarly, 74.2% have examined the use of high yielding/high dividend global equity securities in their clients’ portfolios.

Just under half of advisors said their clients are willing to invest in alternatives, and 51.3% saying clients are hesitant to do so. About 82% of advisors attributed clients’ reluctance to “lack of understanding” and about 50% attributed it to “lack of liquidity.”   

More than 500 responses from participating advisors were collected online by Jefferson National on August 23, 2011, as part of the company’s series of surveys addressing issues important to RIAs and fee-based advisors. 

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The Bucket

Credit Suisse white paper predicts rally in late 2012

In a new white paper, “European Debt Crisis in Focus: Time to Re-Risk Portfolios?” – Robert Parker, managing director and senior advisor to Credit Suisse, tackles the question: In 2012, Will global markets stabilize or will a flight to safe assets like U.S. Treasurers, gold and German Bunds drive market trends again?

Parker argues that “the time might be right for investors to consider increasing their exposure to risky assets.” The paper also provides views on the outlook for equities, emerging markets, corporate credit and commodities.

Several risks that concerned investors last year – such as a global recession or a hard landing in China – may have diminished, Parker writes, and recent ECB actions to provide liquidity to banks and deficit reduction plans by Eurozone governments have modestly improved market sentiment.

Parker anticipates a gradually rising appetite for risk and a sustained rally in the second half of 2012. For a copy of the white paper, contact Katherine Herring at [email protected].  

The Standard launches new indexed annuity

The Standard Insurance Company said it is expanding its annuity product portfolio with the new Index Select Annuity (ISA), a single premium indexed deferred annuity.

The ISA, which features The Standard’s highest interest rate cap, is designed for individuals looking for an annuity to maximize their earnings potential while minimizing their risk.

ISA policyholders can choose a five- or seven-year surrender-charge period and can divide funds between an index interest account linked to the S&P 500 Index (up to a cap) and a fixed interest account.   

The portion of funds allocated to the fixed interest account will be credited an interest rate that is guaranteed for one year. After that guarantee period, the contract will receive renewal rates based on the current interest rate environment.

The annual index term design locks in credited gains in the index at the end of each 12-month period.  

OneAmerica Retirement sales up 51% in 2011

The retirement business of the OneAmerica companies set new records in 2011 for 401(k) sales, employer-sponsored not-for-profit sales, total assets and plan participants.

The OneAmerica companies achieved 51% year-over-year growth in overall retirement sales, including a 67% increase in 401(k) sales. They ended the year with a record 95% percent retention rate on existing business, including 98.6% retention on their large block of tax-exempt health care business.

OneAmerica also achieved 20% growth on existing plans and ended 2011 with more assets under management and plan participants than at any other time in the 130-year-plus history of the enterprise.

OneAmerica added sales, service and marketing personnel in 2011, expanded the distribution of its open-architecture trust solution to registered reps, launched a multiple employer plan and won awards for its custom plan participant communications program. American United Life Insurance Company (AUL), a OneAmerica company, was named the number one 401(k) provider in five key satisfaction categories according to the Boston Research Group’s 2011 Defined Contribution Plan (DCP) Sponsor Satisfaction and Loyalty Study.

LPL study documents value of bank investment and insurance programs 

A new study of the role of investment services and insurance customers at retail financial institutions shows that people who buy investments and insurance at their bank tend to be the bank’s most valuable customers. 

The study, “The Value of an Investment and Insurance Customer to a Bank,” was conducted by Kenneth and Christine Kehrer and Peter Bielan, and was co-sponsored by LPL Financial. The findings include:

  • People who buy investments and insurance where they bank are among a retail financial institution’s most profitable customers.
  • ­Such customers are more likely to stay with that institution than customers who have several banks.
  • ­By under-investing in their investment and insurance services businesses, retail financial institutions miss the opportunity to retain those desirable customers.
  • Consumers who buy investment or insurance products from their primary bank or credit union have checking account balances 16% higher than those households without a brokerage or insurance relationship. 
  • ­Brokerage customers have savings account balances that are on average 85% higher than non-brokerage customers.
  • ­Brokerage and insurance customers have more than twice as many credit products and 11% more remote banking products than customers who have not purchased an investment or insurance product from their primary bank or credit union.  

LPL Financial Institution Services provides third-party investment and insurance services to approximately 670 banks and credit unions nationwide. The new study draws on data from the MacroMonitor.

The 2010/2011 MacroMonitor is a national sample survey of 4,374 households, with an oversample of 1,500 affluent households, reweighted to be representative of the U.S. population.  Consumer Financial Decisions Group of Strategic Business Insights, formerly part of SRI International. Conducts the survey every other year.

Advisor Software Inc. enhances Goal-driven Investing platform  

Advisor Software, Inc. (ASI), a provider of wealth management solutions for advisors market, will add “Collaboration Connect” into its Goal-Based Proposal Solution and goalgamiPro platforms. 

The software enhancement allows investors whose advisors utilize either platform to access and modify goals within their financial plans.

Collaboration Connect streamlines an advisor’s workflow by allowing their clients to add or edit specific goals on their own time.  Because of the wide variety of potential life scenarios that can impact each client, multiple categories are presented within Collaboration Connect to personalize each goal.

“Through the launch of personal financial management applications such as goalgami and goalGetter, we’ve learned how users interact with our software, and how best to structure it so investors are more engaged in the financial planning process,” said Neal Ringquist, president and chief operating officer for ASI.

Collaboration Connect is incorporated into both the ASI Goal-Based Proposal Solution and goalgamiPro. The Goal-Based Proposal Solution applies the asset-liability matching concepts of the pension industries’ liability-driven investing methodology to the retail investment problem, allowing advisors to determine their clients’ capacity for risk by analyzing their entire household picture, and generate an investment recommendation based on that analysis.

goalgamiPro is a household balance sheet diagnostic tool that enables advisors to create one-page plans for clients and help determine the feasibility and affordability of clients’ financial goals.

BMO Retirement Institute launched in U.S.

The Toronto-based BMO Financial Group intends to expand the BMO Retirement Institute into the United States. The Institute provides insight and financial strategies for Americans planning for or in retirement.

The BMO Retirement Institute will examine a variety of topics related to retirement and issue comprehensive reports on the financial and non-financial aspects of this milestone. Its inaugural report, Single in Retirement, was released this week. 

David Weinsier joins Oliver Wyman   

David J. Weinsier, FSA, MAAA, has joined the Actuarial Consulting Practice of Oliver Wyman as a partner and head of the firm’s U.S. Actuarial Life Practic  in Atlanta, Georgia.

With 20 years of life insurance and annuity experience, Weinsier has advised life insurers, reinsurers, investment banks, law firms, and private equity firms. He specializes in mergers & acquisitions, reserve financing solutions, indexed life and annuity products, litigation support, and life insurance mortality.

Weinsier speaks frequently at industry meetings and in 2011 published an award-winning SOA research paper entitled Predictive Modeling for Life Insurers – Application of Predictive Modeling Techniques in Measuring Policyholder Behavior in Variable Annuity Contracts. Before joining Oliver Wyman, he was a director with Towers Watson’s Risk Consulting practice.

Towers Watson downgrades intermediate bonds

Towers Watson has downgraded intermediate global government and intermediate inflation-linked bonds to ‘highly unattractive’.

The global professional services firm says ongoing money-printing by central banks and flows into so-called safe assets have pushed intermediate bond risk premiums to very low levels that no longer properly compensate long-term investors for taking duration risk.

Peter Ryan-Kane, head of Portfolio Advisory for Asia Pacific at Towers Watson, says intermediate bonds “now offer a very low risk premium over cash and/or are discounting a high probability of a macroeconomic backdrop of 10 to 15 years of economic stagnation. This is too pessimistic in our view and our forecast returns suggest bonds are now unattractive.”

Towers Watson research suggests that, in the next year, deleveraging, easy monetary policy and flows into so-called safe bonds are likely to keep bond yields and bond risk premiums low. In the medium-term, as private-sector deleveraging problems fade, there is likely to be a stronger and faster cyclical recovery than most intermediate bond markets appear to be pricing.

 “If investors have a diversified portfolio and a cash benchmark they should typically reduce duration risk by, for example, selling some intermediate bonds to buy cash and high-quality credit to maintain portfolio risk,” Ryan-Kane said.

“Given bonds at most maturities are unattractive at the moment, our general view is that a controlled short interest rate position relative to a fully hedged position is sensible, consistent with the size of other risks within the portfolio.”

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Morningstar establishes online ‘Alternative Investments Center’

As part of several enhancements to MorningstarAdvisor.com, a free website for financial advisors, Morningstar Inc. has launched a new “alternative investments center.”  

“Advisors play a crucial role in educating their clients about alternative investments,” said Nadia Papagiannis, Morningstar’s director of alternative fund research. “Now advisors have a comprehensive resource for providing clients with a more complete perspective on alternative investments.”

The site also contains Morningstar market tools and an expanded video library featuring interviews with top portfolio managers and newsmakers, analysts, and some of the leaders in the advisory community, along with research reports on funds, stocks, ETFs, closed-end funds, and alternatives.

The site currently has three main content tabs: Alternatives, Practice Management, and Research and Insights.

  • Alternatives, the site’s newest tab, provides detailed educational information and analysis of alternative investments, in vehicles such as hedge funds, ETFs, mutual funds, and separate accounts; weekly articles discussing the latest on alternative investment topics and trends; access to Morningstar’s comprehensive quarterly Alternative Investments Observer newsletter; video interviews with alternative investment managers; downloadable handbooks explaining different alternative strategies; and a Solution Center featuring videos and slides designed to help advisors educate their clients about alternative investments.
  • The recently expanded Practice Management tab includes advisor profiles, fiduciary topics, technology news and reviews, and best practices for building an advisory business.
  • Research and Insights features in-depth interviews with leading portfolio managers, research on college savings plans, screening tips for the best stocks and funds for a client portfolio, sector spotlights, and commentary from Don Phillips, Morningstar’s president of fund research.

The enhanced site also features additional components for social interactivity, a discussion feature allowing advisor dialogue and debate on articles and industry issues, a webinar audio archive, and links to Morningstar’s advisor services, publications, and software platforms—Morningstar Advisor Workstation, Morningstar Office, and Morningstar Principia.

RAMP, a web content optimization company based in Woburn, Mass., worked with Morningstar to develop the new user interface and menu navigation, adding faster search and browsing capabilities, and integrating an iPad-enabled video player with a searchable transcript feature.

© 2012 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.