In the battle of savings products, life insurance is still a favorite placement of the French, with an outstanding that has exceeded this year the 2,000 billion outstanding. But in the panoply of French saver, there is also more and more retirement savings plan (PER). In five years of existence, it has already attracted 7.3 million French people, with a fairly close operation of that of life insurance: the saver can distribute its savings between a euro fund (capital guarantee) and account units (UC), invested in more risky investments (shares, real estate, etc.).
However, if it is possible to withdraw your capital at any time with life insurance (to finance a real estate purchase, marriage, a trip, etc.), savings are however blocked on a PER, in principle until retirement, even if there are cases of early release, in particular for the purchase of its main residence. These two long-term savings products, both marketed by banks or insurers, also have similar tax abatements for successions (with perhaps an advantage for the PER). Despite these common points, they will not cost you the same price.
“A higher level (costs) than that observed on life insurance”
This is recalled by the first annual report of the Observatory of Financial Savings Products (depending on the financial sector Advisory Committee (CCSF)), published on Tuesday, July 1. From the data from the Prudential Control and Resolution Authority (ACPR), the report highlights that the IP management costs are on average higher than those found in life insurance. These fees, paid annually on the total spared capital, are used to pay the insurer for the management of funds.
However, in 2023, these costs were on average 0.73% on euros and 0.91% On the UCs for the PER, “Or a higher level than that observed on life insurance”note the report, since on this last product, they were respectively 0.64% And 0.85% on average. If the observatory does not explain by this gap, one can imagine that life insurance, more flexible and allowing to finance many projects, serves more product of call for insurers, and for this reason less loaded with costs.
In addition to management fees, there are also additional costs common to these two products (costs on payments, costs specific to UCs, etc.). But by simulating two investments of the same amount on a PER and life insurance, the OPEF arrives at the conclusion that over 5 years, all of these costs weigh more in PER than life insurance: -1.93% of the performance for the first, against -1.16% for the second. However, it should be kept in mind that these are averages, and that some PERs, notably proposed by digital actors, have considerably planed the costs. This is the case, for example, of the Direct Placement (0.6% of all inclusive costs on the fund in euros and the UCs), the PER Matla de Boursobank (0.5% maximum annual management fees) or even per ramify (0.65% on the Euros and the UC funds), or even amplious freedom (0.65% on the Euros fund).
>> Our service – Test our life insurance comparator
