26/08/2025
The classic โBank versus VULโ comparison has been around for years, but I find it outdated, seriously. While it aims to show the value of a VUL, it often unintentionally creates the wrong impressions โ like thinking that banks are kinda useless, or that a VUL is simply โlike saving in a bank but with free insurance.โ Thatโs not accurate.
And I believe, this is one of the reasons why a lot of people would conclude being โlugiโ or โtaloโ with a VUL when the fund value is not equal or more than the total premiums paid.
Now, donโt get me wrong โ I 100% agree with the main point: saving in the bank alone is never enough. Banks are great for liquidity, emergency funds, and short-term goals, but they donโt provide growth or protection against lifeโs risks. Thatโs where insurance and investments come in.
Another problem with the โBank vs. VULโ approach is how we often use terms like โsavingโ or โdepositingโ in a VUL โ which, crazy enough, was even suggested to me by some โMulTi-awaRded inDividualsโ to help me, according to them, โclose more cases easier and fasterโ. ๐คฎ You see, these terms can mislead people into thinking that whatever amount they put in a VUL policy is the exact amount they can later pull out โ like how a bank savings account work. But thatโs not the case, of course. A portion of the premium goes to charges, which gradually increase as the insured ages. Only the remainder is invested, which forms the withdrawable fund value. Downplaying this part risks making clients believe that the insurance coverages are โfree,โ when in fact, it comes with real costs.
Thatโs why I prefer to explain banks and VULs based on their true purposes. Banks provide safety and accessibility; VULs offer long-term protection and growth potential. When clients understand these roles clearly, they can use both effectivelyโwithout falling into the trap of false comparisons or unrealistic expectations.
Aside from such comparison, using analogies can help explain insurance, yes, but the safer and more ethical way is to present it as it is, with clarityโthat it comes with costs and payables. Insurance is not free, and it shouldnโt be sold as if it is. Being upfront about the commitment avoids false expectations and builds trust. So instead of downplaying the cost, letโs emphasize and hype the value behind it, like what an โINSURANCE ADVISERโ should be doing.
Paying for insurance is not just an expense; itโs a choice to prioritize security and peace of mind over uncertainty.
IโM NOT SAYING STOP USING THIS, BUT USE IT WITH CAUTION AND WITH THE NEEDED DISCLAIMER.
Okay? Thanks for reading, Ka-Taba! ๐
Follow our page:
https://www.facebook.com/financiallyfat/
And join our growing community:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/943480430947454