Whole or Term?

@deltoots Depends on you. I’m an agent.

How’s your health? What are you covering? Whole is better when you’re young. The issue I have with term is when the term is over and either falls off or renews at your current age, it becomes insanely expensive. Especially if you’re 60+ when your workload goes down compared to you being young.

If you’re going to spend an arm and a leg on WL you should get term and invest the difference. But most people can’t do that, they end up spending it.
 
@mrsavage Would you be kind sharing some more info to me. If that’s ok. I understand what you’re saying. But would like it if you elaborate if it’s all right
 
@demetre What you want your policy to pay out is dependent on you. If you just want enough money to cover your funeral expenses, you really only need like $50k in whole life.

If you’re trying to cover your mortgage, usually a term that lasts for the time remaining on the mortgage is better.

Having a large whole life policy, like let’s say 500k. You’re going to spend ALOT on premium. The face value will only be available until you’re 120 years old.

Trying to have equity in a policy isn’t ideal for WL. something that I sell is life paid at 65 which is the ideal policy for “investments” but given how old you are, it will be too pricey.

TL;DR: just get enough to cover the things you want paid for in the event of your death. Getting multiple policies: WL for funeral expenses, term for mortgage or your kids education/trade schooling if you die before they turn 18, is ideal.

The problem is is that if you’re not an agent, you have to do ALOT of digging. If you find an agent, most likely they’re going to “sell” you.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top