All too often, we hear that a potential client decided not to structure because "structure rates are so low right now" or "his financial advisor said he could do better". As frequent as these comments are, we are always surprised by the certainty with which they are stated, especially when some simple comparisons illustrate that they are simply not true.
So why does the myth persist that it is easy to outperform a structure with other investments? Often, it is because the impact of income tax and/or management expense fees is NOT taken into account when alternatives to a structure are presented.
Would you be surprised to learn that, at current rates, a traditional "balanced" mutual fund would have to guarantee you an annual return (from day one and continuing year after year) of 6%, just to match what a 20 year tax-free structured settlement provides in guaranteed payments? We all know that with mutual funds, nothing is guaranteed, whereas a structured settlement offers assured returns.