When comparing investment in an immediate life annuity with a payout-equivalent investment fund decumulation plan (self-annuitization), previous research focused on shortfall probabilities of self-annuitization. Chances of self-annuitization (i.e., bequests) typically have not been addressed. We argue that heirs might be willing to bear the shortfall risk of the retiree's self-annuitization since they might benefit from a bequest. Our article proposes a "family strategy" in which heirs receive the remaining investment fund on the retiree's death, but are obliged to finance the retiree if the fund becomes exhausted. We estimate the chance and risk profile of this "family strategy" from the heirs' perspective using German capital and annuity market data. We show that in many cases, our "family strategy" offers enormous chance potential with low shortfall risk. Finally, we discuss some limitations of the proposed "family strategy" when putting the concept into practice.
Currently, regulatory authorities and consumers ask for more cost transparency with respect to financial product components. In life insurance, for instance, the premium for products should be split in its components: A premium for death benefits, the savings premium, the cost of an investment guarantee, and the administration costs. In this regard, it is important for insurance companies and regulators to know to what extent the way of presenting the prices of an offer affects consumer evaluation of the product. Based on a paper by Huber et al. (How do price presentation effects influence consumer choice? The case of life insurance products. Working paper, 2011) as presented at the annual meeting of Deutscher Verein für Versicherungswissenschaft in 2011, this article presents the effects of different forms of presenting the price of life insurance contract components and especially of investment guarantees on consumer evaluation of this product. This is done by means of an experimental study using a representative panel for Switzerland and by focusing on unit-linked life insurance products. The findings reveal that, contrary to consumer products, there is no effect of price bundling and price optic on consumer evaluation and purchase intention for life insurance products. However, there is a significant moderating effect of consumer experience with insurance products on this relationship.
Interest rate guarantees in unit-linked life insurance products ensure that at contract maturity, at least a minimum guaranteed amount is paid, even if the mutual fund falls below the guaranteed level. Strongly depending on the riskiness of the underlying mutual fund, these guarantees can be of substantial value. However, while insurer pricing is based on the replication of cash flows, customers are more likely to base their decisions on individual preferences. The aim of this paper is to contrast reservation prices for guarantees in unit-linked life insurance policies based on customers subjective willingness to pay with a financial pricing approach, an investigation that has not been undertaken to date. To do so, we use an online questionnaire survey as well as calculate reservation prices using option pricing theory. Our findings reveal that even though the majority of the participants in the online questionnaire are employed in the field of insurance, subjective prices are difficult to derive and are significantly lower on average than the prices obtained using a financial pricing model. However, a considerable portion of participants is still willing to pay a substantially higher price
