In Germany, there are two main types of health insurance: the statutory health insurance (Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung, GKV) and private health insurance (Private Krankenversicherung, PKV). Both systems have distinct advantages and disadvantages, and one of the key factors that influence people's choices between the two is the contribution cost and its development over time. This post explores the contribution trends in both GKV and PKV, comparing the price increases and analyzing how private insurance can actually provide savings over the long term.
To understand the price dynamics in GKV and PKV, let's look at an example: a customer born in 1989, without children, comparing their contributions between 2016 and 2025 in both systems.
| Year | Insurance Type | Coverage | Contribution (€) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | TK GKV | Basic Coverage | 775.47 |
| Signal PKV Komfort Plus 1 | Komfort Coverage | 424.39 | |
| PKV Komfort Plus 1 Extra | Daily Allowance from 43rd Day: 130 €/day | 33.67 | |
| Nursing Insurance (PVN) | 20.72 | ||
| Summary | Total PKV 2016 | 478.78 | |
| 2025 | GKV | Basic Coverage | 1,174.17 |
| PKV Komfort Plus 1 | Komfort Coverage | 520.39 | |
| PKV Komfort Plus 1 Extra | Daily Allowance from 43rd Day: 130 €/day | 33.67 | |
| Nursing Insurance (PVN) | 60.26 | ||
| Total PKV 2025 | 614.32 |
As shown in the table, while GKV contributions have increased substantially from €775.47 in 2016 to €1,174.17 in 2025, PKV contributions have remained relatively stable, rising from €478.78 in 2016 to €614.32 in 2025. Despite many reports highlighting contribution increases in PKV, this data illustrates that PKV can, in fact, provide more stable costs over time, particularly when considering various refund options and bonuses.
It’s a common belief that PKV contributions rise uncontrollably, making it a risky choice for young professionals. However, as seen in this example, PKV can actually offer more controlled growth in contributions compared to GKV.
In our case study, GKV contributions increased by over 50% from 2016 to 2025, while PKV contributions rose by only around 28%. This difference becomes even more pronounced when considering additional savings and cash-back bonuses that are available in many PKV policies, which are rarely offered in GKV.
A unique advantage of PKV is the possibility of receiving refunds and bonuses for not utilizing certain services. In this case, the client has accumulated significant savings over the years due to cash-back options and bonuses:
This results in substantial financial advantages over time. For individuals who maintain a healthy lifestyle and do not frequently access healthcare services, PKV's cash-back programs can lead to significant savings. In contrast, GKV does not offer such refunds, as contributions are fixed based on income levels and are redistributed across the insured pool.
The data also highlights another often-overlooked benefit of PKV: long-term stability. Unlike GKV, where contributions are directly linked to income and the financial situation of the broader health insurance system, PKV contributions are calculated based on individual risk and do not fluctuate with income changes. This makes PKV particularly attractive for high-earning professionals who may face steep increases in GKV contributions over time as their income grows.
Additionally, PKV contributions can be more predictable and manageable for individuals who prefer stable costs, particularly when combined with cash-back opportunities and bonuses. For young professionals planning for the future, the stability of PKV contributions is often worth considering, especially in comparison to the variable nature of GKV contributions.
The example above challenges the common perception that PKV contributions inevitably increase uncontrollably. In reality, PKV can be a cost-effective option, especially when factoring in the refunds and bonuses. While PKV may not suit everyone, it can offer financial benefits for those who value stability, predictability, and potential long-term savings.
For those currently navigating the health insurance landscape in Germany, it’s important to weigh these factors carefully. While GKV is often perceived as the safer, more stable option, PKV can provide substantial savings and stability for those who are informed about their options. With the right plan, PKV can be a valuable alternative to GKV, offering both cost advantages and peace of mind.
In the end, the decision between GKV and PKV should be based on individual needs, financial goals, and lifestyle. This example shows that PKV, despite its reputation for higher costs, can actually offer more predictable growth in contributions and tangible financial benefits.