Earlier, only insurance companies were floating unit-linked plans. Now, mutual funds, too, have these. Is the line between units and mutual funds blurring? Before answering this question, one should ask oneself if unit-linked plans offered by insurance companies are the same as investing in similar plans of mutual funds. Most people believe unit-linked plans offered by insurance companies are superior products compared with MFs. This is because insurance companies have positioned this product as a savings product, which offers the benefit of insurance as well as market-related returns. Before we get into the nitty-gritty of the issue, let us first understand what the differences between insurance and mutual funds are.
First, insurance is a transfer technique whereby the insured (investor) transfers his risk of financial loss to another party, the insurance company or insurer. The insurance company, in turn, makes good the losses arising due to an uncertain event and distributes the costs of insuring these loses among all of its policyholders. Therefore, the primary aim of insurance products is to help in risk management, in the handling of an uncertain event. Therefore, people who put money in insurance companies for the purpose of earning good returns are going against the fundamental purpose for which insurance companies came into existence i.e., risk management.
MFs, on the other hand, refer to a process of pooling of investments that are invested in the capital market by professional fund managers, to generate market-related returns for investors. In light of the above, any product which is predominantly investment-oriented should be a mutual fund product, as these funds are better equipped and have the skill to manage such products.
The core activity of a mutual fund is to invest money on behalf of its investors and generate market-related returns. The term ‘insurance cover’ that is provided by some mutual funds is purely a value-added service to investors. It is pertinent to note that mutual funds are not equipped to provide insurance cover, as it is not their core business; they buy the insurance cover for their unit-holders from an insurance company. This is unlike insurance companies, who invest the money themselves, rather than asking an asset management company to do so.
In our country, insurance products had always been sold with a savings element in them. Over the past few years, ULIPs of insurance products have become popular owing to the boom in the equity market. However, the first unit-linked insurance product i.e., UTI ULIP, was launched by a mutual fund in 1971. Although the first ULIP was launched by a mutual fund, it has not been possible for mutual funds to compete in this market, due to the absence of a level playing field. The limits on expenses, the rules and regulations, the level of transparency, all are skewed in favour of insurance companies, making it difficult for mutual funds to compete.
It is immaterial who launches ULIP products, but what are required are uniform rules and regulations. In the absence of these, insurance companies will continue to poach in a territory alien to them. And, perhaps, get away, as the mutual funds may not raise a hue and cry, as their sponsors may also have an insurance company in their stable.
In fact, insurance companies should concentrate more on ‘risk management products’, which is their core competence, and leave the floor open to mutual fund houses to manage investment products. There is a lot of scope for launch of such products and it is ironical that not many insurance companies are focussing on term assurance products and other risk products without any savings element, which is their core competence.
On the other hand, with equity schemes of mutual funds also tax exempt — almost on par with insurance products—mutual funds should launch more ULIPs, with the insurance companies providing term assurance cover. Investors will be very much benefited, as they get lower expense ratios, professional fund management, better transparency and also insurance cover provided by insurance companies. It will be a win-win situation for all the players.
—The writer is vice-president, UTI Asset Management Co. These are his personal views