IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijecbr/v11y2016i1p83-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A risk and return analysis of selected unit linked insurance plans of selected public and private sector insurance companies

Author

Listed:
  • Anand Bansal
  • Amarjeet Kaur

Abstract

One innovation, which stormed Indian life insurance market, was the introduction of the unit linked insurance plans (ULIPs). ULIPs impart the advantage of killing two birds with one stone as it contains insurance component which provides financial security to the family in case of death of the policy holder and its investment component delivers returns along with flexibility and transparency of the investment. In this paper, an attempt has been made to compare the performance of ULIPs of Indian life insurance companies after consideration of two major factors, i.e., risk and return. Statistical measures such as internal rate of return (XIRR) for irregular cash flows, beta, R-square have been used to evaluate the performance of ULIPs from different aspects. Return of ULIPs has been calculated by including and excluding charges as these charges affect the return of ULIPs substantially. The study is analytical and descriptive in nature.

Suggested Citation

  • Anand Bansal & Amarjeet Kaur, 2016. "A risk and return analysis of selected unit linked insurance plans of selected public and private sector insurance companies," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 83-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijecbr:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:83-99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=74432
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roman Inderst & Marco Ottaviani, 2009. "Misselling through Agents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 883-908, June.
    2. Krausz, Miriam & Paroush, Jacob, 2002. "Financial advising in the presence of conflict of interests," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 55-71.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eman Ismail & Yasser Tawfik Halim & Mohamed Samy EL-Deeb, 2023. "Corporate reputation and shareholder investment: a study of Egypt's tourism listed companies," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Danilov, Anastasia & Biemann, Torsten & Kring, Thorn & Sliwka, Dirk, 2013. "The dark side of team incentives: Experimental evidence on advice quality from financial service professionals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 266-272.
    2. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.
    3. Brenner, Lukas & Meyll, Tobias, 2020. "Robo-advisors: A substitute for human financial advice?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    4. Sumitro Banerjee & Alex P. Thevaranjan, 2013. "How to deal with unprofitable customers? A salesforce compensation perspective," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-05, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    5. Stephen Foerster & Juhani T. Linnainmaa & Brian T. Melzer & Alessandro Previtero, 2017. "Retail Financial Advice: Does One Size Fit All?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1441-1482, August.
    6. David Bardey & Denis Gromb & David Martimort & Jérôme Pouyet, 2020. "Controlling Sellers Who Provide Advice: Regulation and Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 409-444, September.
    7. Jonathan B. Berk & Jules H. Van Binsbergen, 2022. "Regulation of Charlatans in High‐Skill Professions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(2), pages 1219-1258, April.
    8. Simona Grassi & Ching-to Albert Ma, 2016. "Information acquisition, referral, and organization," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 935-960, November.
    9. Robert M. Gillenkirch & Julia Ortner & Sebastian Robert & Louis Velthuis, 2023. "Designing incentives and performance measurement for advisors: How to make decision-makers listen to advice," Working Papers 2304, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    10. Monti, Marco & Pelligra, Vittorio & Martignon, Laura & Berg, Nathan, 2014. "Retail investors and financial advisors: New evidence on trust and advice taking heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1749-1757.
    11. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2015. "Money Doctors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(1), pages 91-114, February.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, "undated". "Money Doctors," Working Paper 69721, Harvard University OpenScholar.
      • Gennaioli, Nicola & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 2014. "Money Doctors," Scholarly Articles 12965657, Harvard University Department of Economics.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2012. "Money Doctors," Working Papers 464, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 2012. "Money Doctors," NBER Working Papers 18174, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, "undated". "Money Doctors," Working Paper 228501, Harvard University OpenScholar.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2012. "Money doctors," Economics Working Papers 1355, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    12. Özalp Özer & Upender Subramanian & Yu Wang, 2018. "Information Sharing, Advice Provision, or Delegation: What Leads to Higher Trust and Trustworthiness?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 474-493, January.
    13. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    14. Kramer, Marc M., 2016. "Financial literacy, confidence and financial advice seeking," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 198-217.
    15. Hermansson, Cecilia & Song, Han-Suck, 2016. "Financial advisory services meetings and their impact on saving behavior – A difference-in-difference analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 131-139.
    16. Mikhail Drugov & Marta Troya‐Martinez, 2019. "Vague lies and lax standards of proof: On the law and economics of advice," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 298-315, April.
    17. Delis, Manthos & Galariotis, Emilios & Monne, Jerome, 2021. "Financial vulnerability and seeking expert advice: Evidence from a survey experiment," MPRA Paper 107095, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Dell'Era, Michele, 2019. "Talking to Influence and the Consulting Paradox," MPRA Paper 93803, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Utz Weitzel & Michael Kirchler, 2022. "The Banker's Oath And Financial Advice," Working Papers 2022-13, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. Florian Heider & Roman Inderst, 2012. "Loan Prospecting," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(8), pages 2381-2415.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijecbr:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:83-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=310 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.