An article by Lance Wallach appeared on the Gerson Lehrman Group website claiming the life settlement industry would die within two years. His comments set the life settlement forums, blogging community and pundits into a frenzy. While Wallach made a number of accurate observations, the pessimistic conclusion drawn for the life settlement industry is built on faulty logic at best.
Wallach reasoned that because the past couple of years had seen low offers and lack of bids for policies in the secondary life insurance market that “the future of the life settlement market is dim”. However, the conditions that dragged on the life settlement market during the past two years are not likely to persist into the future. A lack of liquidity from institutional investors that feed capital into the life settlement market was the number one drag on valuations and offers. Quite simply the money used to buy policies was limited because investors had few credit facilities and limited capital available to deploy. This was not something inherently wrong with the life settlement market, rather it was an inevitable reality of the broader capital markets.
Wallach added “I think that the life settlement market will not have any future source of funds within two years.” This is clearly not the case. As financial institutions resume more normal liquidity levels and credit facilities again become available the demand in the life settlement market will consequently increase. The life settlement recovery is already underway in 2010 with more providers regaining funding and become active in the marketplace. At the end of the day, the hedge fund managers, private equity executives and investment bank traders must deploy their capital where they get the best returns. Many life settlement investors are now buying with 19% target IRR’s. Those kinds of returns are hard to ignore as an investment manager.
Another pillar of Wallach’s argument against the continued health of the life settlement industry is the proliferation of life settlement legislation. While life settlements are now regulated in 40 states and consequently the cost of doing business has increased for life settlement brokers and providers, the net effect isn’t all bad. In fact, a handful of states, and new NCOIL model act language now being considered, require life insurance carriers to notify policy owners that life settlements are an option when they are going to surrender or allow a policy to lapse. That can only be viewed as a positive signal for the longevity of the life settlement market.
The life settlement industry certainly has suffered along with the rest of the world over the past two years. But those difficulties should not be perceived as an indication of the long term strength of the secondary life insurance market. As a consumer friendly transaction, life settlements are enjoying continued protection by legislators and increased attention by investors seeking healthy returns. Those two things alone should ensure life settlements have a place for years to come.
Looking to find the best information from a life settlement broker, then visit technorati for the latest life insurance market commentary.