Investment Insurance

naaip

Financial and investment insurance

You are probably already familiar with insurance types such as health insurance, home insurance, car insurance, and life insurance, but have you considered financial and investment insurance. Financial and investment insurance refers to products and strategies designed to protect savings and investments against risks that could otherwise erode wealth. While investing aims to grow capital, insurance is about safeguarding that growth from uncertainty, whether it comes from market downturns, unexpected life events, or institutional failures.

For individuals, financial insurance provides peace of mind that their families and assets are protected even if something goes wrong. For businesses and institutions, it reduces exposure to risks that could disrupt operations or wipe out hard-earned profits. Governments, too, recognize the importance of protection and have developed investor safety nets to ensure confidence in the financial system.

Unlike pure investments, which carry inherent risks tied to performance, and unlike traditional insurance policies that only cover specific losses, financial and investment insurance sits at the intersection of both. It balances growth potential with a safety net, creating a structure where wealth can be built with greater stability. For anyone serious about financial planning, understanding how insurance fits into investment strategy is just as important as choosing the right stocks, bonds, or funds.

Looking ahead, the role of insurance in investing will likely expand. With technology making products more accessible, regulations strengthening trust, and demographic trends driving demand for retirement security, financial insurance is becoming an integral part of modern wealth management. Investors who incorporate it into their strategies are not avoiding risk altogether but are managing it in a way that creates stability, predictability, and resilience.

What is Financial and Investment Insurance?

Financial and investment insurance is a broad term that covers products and mechanisms designed to protect money that has been saved or invested. At its core, it combines two goals that often feel at odds with each other: the pursuit of returns through investing and the reduction of risk through insurance. While traditional insurance focuses on covering losses from accidents, illness, or damage, financial insurance deals specifically with safeguarding wealth and ensuring that investors or their families are not left vulnerable.

One type of investment insurance are the financial insurance products are structured to provide both protection and, in many cases, growth. For example, life insurance policies with investment components build cash value over time while also guaranteeing a payout in the event of death. Similarly, annuities provide a stream of income in retirement, acting as both an investment vehicle and an insurance policy against outliving one’s savings.

The scope also extends to strategies like portfolio insurance, which uses financial instruments such as options or structured products to limit downside losses in investment accounts. On a more institutional level, government-backed safety nets such as deposit insurance or investor compensation schemes act as financial insurance by ensuring savers do not lose all their money if a bank or broker fails.

The key distinction between financial insurance and pure investment is intent. Investments focus on growth and carry risk, while insurance emphasizes protection and stability. By merging these two aims, financial and investment insurance offers a way to participate in markets while still having a buffer against uncertainty. It does not eliminate risk entirely, but it redistributes it in a way that makes financial planning more predictable.

Financial and investment insurance sits at the point where protection meets growth. It is not designed to replace investing, nor is it meant to function like traditional insurance alone. Instead, it bridges the gap between the two, offering investors a way to build wealth while maintaining safeguards against the unpredictable. For families, it ensures continuity. For individuals, it secures retirement income. For investors, it provides confidence that their efforts to grow capital will not be undone by a single setback.

The options available are diverse, ranging from life insurance policies with built-in savings components to investment-linked plans, annuities, portfolio protection strategies, and government-backed safety nets. Each has strengths and limitations, and the right choice depends on personal goals, time horizons, and risk tolerance. While costs and complexity are real considerations, the value of security often outweighs these drawbacks, particularly for long-term financial planning. At its core, financial and investment insurance is about peace of mind; the assurance that even in uncertain markets and uncertain times, there is a layer of protection standing between an investor and complete loss. For anyone serious about building lasting wealth, that assurance can be as valuable as the investments themselves.

Types of Financial and Investment Insurance

Financial and investment insurance comes in several forms, each designed to address different risks and goals. Some products focus on protecting families through life coverage, others are built to safeguard portfolios from market shocks, while government-backed schemes act as a last line of defense for savers in case their bank or broker becomes insolvent and funds have been co-mingled. Understanding the main categories helps investors see how protection can fit alongside traditional investment choices.

Life Insurance with Investment Components

Life insurance has traditionally been viewed as a tool to provide financial protection for families in the event of a breadwinner’s death. Depending on the size of the policy, life insurance can make it possible for dependents to maintain their standard of living, cover debts, or at least meet essential expenses when income is suddenly cut off. While this remains its core purpose even now, the insurance industry has developed policies that combine this protective function with the ability to build financial assets over time. These are known as life insurance policies with investment components, most notably whole life insurance and universal life insurance.

Unlike term life insurance, which provides coverage for a fixed period and pays only a death benefit, whole life and universal life policies are designed to last for the lifetime of the insured. A portion of the premium goes toward the guaranteed death benefit, ensuring dependents receive a payout when the policyholder passes away. The other portion is allocated to a cash value account that grows over time, functioning as a savings or investment component within the policy.

In certain jurisdictions, the cash value will accumulate on a tax-deferred basis, meaning policyholders do not pay taxes on the growth until they withdraw funds. Over time, this balance can become a significant asset, which can be borrowed against or even withdrawn if needed. In many cases, loans taken against the policy are not taxed, providing a flexible source of liquidity that does not disrupt other investments. The laws and regulations do vary from one jurisdiction to the next, so it is very important to research your own particular situation before you make any decisions.

Whole Life Insurance

Whole life insurance provides lifetime coverage with fixed premiums and a guaranteed minimum cash value growth rate. This makes it highly predictable and attractive to those who want both security and certainty. Insurers often invest the cash value portion conservatively, meaning returns are steady but relatively modest. In exchange, policyholders benefit from guaranteed stability, both in terms of death benefits and asset growth.

Dividends may also be paid in some whole life policies, depending on the insurer’s financial performance. These dividends can be reinvested to increase cash value, used to reduce premiums, or taken as cash. However, dividends are not guaranteed, so they should be seen as an extra benefit rather than a certainty.

Universal Life Insurance

Universal life insurance introduces more flexibility than whole life. Premium payments can be adjusted within limits, and policyholders can allocate contributions differently between the insurance coverage and the investment account. This flexibility allows for changes in circumstances, such as increasing contributions during higher earning years and reducing them later on.

The cash value in universal life policies is tied to market performance, either through fixed interest rates set by the insurer or through market-linked sub-accounts that behave like mutual funds. This creates the potential for higher returns compared with whole life, but it also introduces more risk, as growth depends on investment performance.

Advantages of Investment-Linked Life Insurance

One of the biggest advantages of these policies is dual purpose: they provide both lifelong protection and a means of building wealth. Unlike pure investments, the insurance guarantee ensures that beneficiaries will receive a payout no matter what happens to market conditions. For individuals seeking both security for their families and an additional layer of long-term savings, these policies provide a balance.

In some jurisdictions, they also offer tax advantages, because cash value growth is tax-deferred. There are also jurisdictions where loans taken against the policy are not treated as taxable income. This makes them attractive to high earners who are already maxing out other tax-efficient investment vehicles.

The ability to borrow against cash value provides financial flexibility. Policyholders can access liquidity without selling other investments or disrupting long-term strategies. In emergencies, this can be a valuable safety net.

Limitations and Considerations

Despite their advantages, life insurance with investment components is not without drawbacks. Premiums are significantly higher than for term life insurance, which only provides coverage without the savings element. For individuals solely concerned with affordable protection, term life may be a better choice. The returns on the investment component also tend to be lower than what could be achieved through direct investments in stocks, bonds, or funds. The trade-off is predictability and security, but those seeking aggressive growth may find the investment side underwhelming.

Finally, the complexity and costs of these policies (e.g. management fees, surrender charges, and administrative expenses) can make them difficult for some policyholders to fully understand. Choosing a policy requires careful review of the terms and clear alignment with long-term financial goals.

Examples of points to keep an eye on:

  • Hidden and high fees
    Hybrid policies tend to have multiple fees (commission, management fees, mortality charges, surrender charges, etcetera) that eat into the investment side. Consumers often don’t realize how much is being charged, especially not compared to what they would pay for separate insurance and a few separate index funds.
  • Lack of or misleading disclosure
    Consumers are sometimes not given clear, accurate, or sufficient information about risk, costs, performance assumptions, or the terms under which they can surrender/cancel.
  • Lock‐in periods & surrender penalties
    The investment component is often illiquid or has big penalties for early withdrawal, meaning consumers can’t get their money without big losses if they need out. This is a part of the concept, but it is important that you, the consumer, fully understand the rules before you hand over your money.
  • Assumptions that don’t hold
    Projections of returns assume optimistic scenarios; when markets perform poorly, returns fall far short of what was promised or implied. For the consumer, it is important to understand the difference between optimistic projections, realistic projections, worst-case scenarios, and guarantees.
  • Conflict of interest due to sales commissions
    When financial advisors (salespersons) are paid large commissions for selling these products, there is incentive for them to push them onto consumers even when they are not suitable. This is especially true when other solutions would result in no commission at all or a much lower commission, and the salesperson is getting paid largely from commissions.
  • Conflict of interest due to kick-backs from investment funds Financial advisors (salespersons) can encourage you to invest your money in funds or other entities that will give a big kick-back to the salesperson or to the company the salesperson works for.
  • Regulatory arbitrage
    Companies can be deliberately registered in jurisdictions with weak consumer protection rules and oversight, where they can engage in practices that would not be allowed in your country. Some corporations use very complex structures (reinsurance, offshore investments) in their attempts to avoid certain regulations or risk disclosures.
  • Misrepresentation
    Financial advisors (salespersons) and the companies they work for can exaggerate the projected investment returns, understate or be vague about fees, or fail to make clear how much of what you pay goes to insurance vs. investment vs. commission. This can be difficult to prove later on, especially when the information is given orally and not written down. Potential buyers asking for written confirmation can be buried in stacks of fine print terms and conditions.

Note: These points are not unique to life insurance with investment components, and of them are really good to keep in mind regardless of which investment/insurance product you are considering.

Examples of Scandals and Controversies Involving Life Insurance With Investment Products

If you are interested in learning more, this little list of scandals and controversies can serve as a stepping stone for further investigation. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

  • Equity Funding Corporation of America (USA, 1970s)

They marketed life insurance + mutual funds packages, but collapsed in a massive accounting fraud that involved fake policies and false records.

  • New York Life & MassMutual – Madoff-linked VULs (USA, lawsuits in 2010)

Variable Universal Life (VUL) policies from these insurers invested in feeder funds exposed to Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme. Investors sued, claiming the insurers failed to perform adequate due diligence.

  • Woekerpolisaffaire (Netherlands, 1990s-2000s, scandal broke in the mid-2000s)

Millions of Dutch consumers bought unit-linked life insurance (“beleggingsverzekeringen”), but large parts of their premiums were swallowed by opaque fee structures and commissions. Returns were far lower than projected. Lawsuits followed, leading to regulatory changes and some compensation schemes.

  • Mavuno Life Assurance Scheme (Kenya, early 2010s)

Marketed as a life insurance-linked investment with promised returns of 7–10% monthly or weekly. Investors lost around KSh 100 million (~$1 million) when the scheme collapsed. It bore characteristics of a pyramid scheme, with minimal regulatory oversight.

Investment-Linked Insurance Plans (ILPs)

Investment-Linked Insurance Plans, commonly referred to as ILPs, are hybrid financial products that blend traditional life insurance with the flexibility of investment funds.

IPLs are especially popular in certain parts of Asia, including Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, the Philippines, and Indonesia. If you are looking for something similar (not identical) in the United States, look for Variable Life Insurance, Variable Universal Life Insurance (VUL), or Indexed Universal Life (IUL).

Unlike conventional policies where premiums are allocated mainly toward life coverage with a small portion going into a guaranteed cash value account, ILPs allow policyholders to actively participate in financial markets by linking their premiums to chosen investment funds. This structure has made ILPs particularly popular among investors who want both protection and direct exposure to growth opportunities.

When a policyholder pays premiums into an ILP, the money is split into two components. One part covers the cost of life insurance, ensuring beneficiaries receive a payout in the event of the policyholder’s death. The remainder is invested in funds selected by the policyholder. These funds may include equity funds, bond funds, money market funds, or balanced portfolios that combine different asset classes.

Unlike traditional insurance with fixed guarantees, the returns in ILPs depend entirely on the performance of the chosen investments. If the funds perform well, the cash value of the policy grows; if they perform poorly, the cash value decreases. This creates greater potential for long-term growth but also exposes the policyholder to market risk.

Benefits of ILPs

For many, the main advantage of ILPs is that they provide life protection alongside investment growth. Unlike buying insurance and investments separately, ILPs package them together in a single plan. For people who want simplicity and integration, this structure is attractive. ILPs can offer potentially higher returns than traditional life insurance with cash value. Because funds are linked to financial markets, they can deliver stronger growth, particularly over long periods when markets tend to rise. For disciplined investors who are comfortable with volatility, this creates a meaningful opportunity to grow wealth.

One of the defining strengths of ILPs is the level of customization they offer. Policyholders are not locked into a single fund or allocation; most plans allow switching between funds as financial goals or market conditions change. For example, someone may start with a higher allocation in equities during their younger years and later shift to bonds or conservative funds as they approach retirement. ILPs with flexible fund-switching features will also allow policyholders to react to market trends without having to close or repurchase new policies. This makes ILPs more dynamic compared to fixed insurance contracts.

Premium payments are also more flexible compared to rigid whole life policies. Many ILPs allow policyholders to adjust contribution amounts or make top-up payments when they have extra income. This adaptability makes ILPs well-suited for individuals with changing financial circumstances.

Risks and Drawbacks of ILPs

The benefits of ILPs come with significant trade-offs. The most obvious is market risk. Since cash value is tied to fund performance, there are no guaranteed returns. A prolonged downturn in equity or bond markets can reduce the value of the policy, even while premiums continue to be paid.

Another drawback is cost. ILPs often involve multiple layers of charges, including policy fees, fund management fees, insurance charges, and switching costs. These can eat into returns over time, making actual performance lower than expected.

ILPs carry a level of complexity. Unlike straightforward life policies, they require policyholders to monitor investment performance, understand fee structures, and make allocation decisions. Without financial literacy or proper advice, policyholders may underperform or fail to take advantage of the flexibility ILPs offer.

Who Should Consider ILPs?

ILPs are best suited for individuals who:

  • Want both life protection and investment opportunities in one product.
  • Have a medium- to long-term investment horizon.
  • Are comfortable with the ups and downs of financial markets.
  • Can afford higher premiums compared to basic life insurance.

ILPs may not be appropriate for those seeking guaranteed returns or for people who prefer straightforward insurance coverage at the lowest possible cost.

Understanding the Background

Today, Investment-Linked Insurance Plans (ILPs) are strongly associated with South-East Asia, but they actually originated in the United Kingdom. In the 1960s, British insurers began offering policies that combined life coverage with investment in unit trusts (mutual funds), and these policies were known as “unit-linked life insurance” products. In the 1970s, the concept matured in the UK and parts of Europe, and increasingly complex versions were launched, with multiple fund choices and premium flexibility.

ILPs in South East Asia

The concept did not expand to South East Asia until the 1980s, when it was adopted and adapted in markets such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia. In the 1980s and 1990s, this type of insurance plan grew fast here due to the rising middle class’s appetite for investments and flexible financial planning tools. Examples of international insurers that helped pave the way are AIA, Prudential, and Manulife. Policies were usually tailored to local markets. In the early years, fund choices were pretty limited. From the mid-1990s, ILPs expanded into countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand. On some markets, banks began promoting ILPs very aggressively through their financial advisors. By the early 2000s, ILPs had reached mainstream popularity in many South East Asian countries, but the industry also came under increased legal scrutiny due to pushy sales agents misrepresenting the contracts´s true terms and conditions, and advising individuals to purchase ILPs even in situations where other solutions would have been much better.

In the 2010s, insurers targeting South East Asian investors began offering ILPs with robo-advisors. These were simple early-stage robo-advisors (without AI). Giving investors access to a much larger array of investment choices within the policy was also a strong trend. At the same time, law makers continued their efforts to clean up the industry with stricter regulation, including firmer rules regarding performance reporting and transparent fee structures. In the 2020s, we have seen a rise in index-linked low-cost alternatives, targeting investors who want to stay clear of the more expensive conventional ILPs.

Why did ILPs become such a big thing in South East Asia? It was due to a combination of factors. The countries where ILPs flourished were countries where the economy grew rapidly in the late 20th century and the middle-class segment of society grew with it. For this class, getting both insurance and investment in a bundle was appealing, and the costs were within their reach. At the same time, many of these countries still had an under-developed retail finance industry and it was difficult for these new middle-class households to gain access to conventional investment choices such as putting money directly into a mutual fund or the stock market. For many, ILPs became a gateway to investing in the financial markets. Insurance companies enjoyed a high degree of trust, and many households took their sales-pitches as unbiased advice. Bancasurrance was also a big thing, and this helped with the proliferation of ILPs. Bancassurance is a partnership between a bank and an insurance company where the bank distributes insurance products to its customers. In essence, the bank act as an insurance agents, selling life, health, or investment-linked insurance plans directly to their banking customers. “Advisors” were actually salespersons earning high commissions, a system that promoted aggressive sales tactics. There was no strong framework in place for consumer protection, and many consumers were given misleading information or sold products without full risk disclosure.

Is unit-linked life insurance still popular in the United Kingdom?

No, even though the unit-linked life insurance concept was born in the UK, it is no longer a popular product there. In the UK, investor interest in traditional unit-linked life insurance has seen a sharp decline in the 21st century, prompted by a combination of factor. Today, UK investors are more likely to pick term life insurance (many simple and low-cost policies are available), standalone investment products (including investments held in tax-advantaged ISAs), and whole-of-life or guaranteed policies for more comprehensive estate planning. It is chiefly very high-net-worth individuals that still look for investment-linked life insurance, as they can use it for inheritance tax planning and trust-based estate structures.

In 2012, the Retail Distribution Review (RDR) banned commission-based sales of investment products in the UK, and this made the ILPs less appealing to advisors/salespersons. Just as in South East Asia, ILPs had become associated with mis-selling, high and opaque costs, and a general lack of transparency. Customers had grown vary of layered management, admin, and surrender fees, and had begun looking for more transparent no-bundling choices.

In short, ILPs are no longer mainstream in the UK. They are legacy products that still exists in niche wealth management and estate plans, but the general public is going for solutions that are cheaper and less opaque.

Annuities and Similar Retirement Products

Annuities are financial contracts designed to provide steady income, most often during retirement when regular paychecks stop. They work on a simple principle: the individual pays money to an insurance company, either as a lump sum or through periodic contributions, and in return, the insurer guarantees to make payments back at regular intervals for a defined period or for the rest of the policyholder’s life. This mechanism transforms accumulated savings into a predictable income stream, offering peace of mind that essential expenses can be covered even in later years.

When someone buys an annuity, they enter into a contract with an insurance company. The money paid into the annuity becomes the foundation for future payouts. The insurer invests these funds and manages them on behalf of the annuitant. Depending on the type of annuity, payouts may be fixed and stable or variable and tied to investment performance.

Payments can begin immediately after purchase (an immediate annuity) or at a later date (a deferred annuity). Immediate annuities are common for retirees who want instant income, while deferred annuities are often used by people still working who want to build up funds for future retirement.

Fixed Annuities

Fixed annuities provide stable and predictable payouts. The insurer guarantees a specific return rate, meaning the annuitant knows exactly how much income they will receive each month or year. This certainty makes fixed annuities especially attractive to conservative investors and retirees who prioritize security over growth. Some fixed annuities also come with minimum return guarantees, ensuring payments do not drop below an agreed level regardless of market conditions. The downside of fixed annuities is that returns are often modest compared with other investments. In periods of high inflation, the fixed payouts may lose purchasing power over time, which is a key consideration for long-term planning.

Variable Annuities

Variable annuities add a growth element by linking payouts to the performance of chosen investment funds, often mutual funds offered within the policy. This means the annuitant has the potential to benefit from rising markets, but they also bear the risk of lower payments if the investments underperform. Variable annuities appeal to those willing to accept some volatility in exchange for the possibility of higher returns. They often include optional riders, such as guaranteed minimum income benefits, which add a layer of protection against poor market performance but usually come with additional costs.

Why Annuities Can Matter in Retirement

One of the biggest risks in retirement is longevity risk, the possibility of outliving one’s savings. Unlike a bank account that can eventually be depleted, annuities provide income for life if structured that way. This makes them a form of insurance against uncertainty in lifespan. No one can predict exactly how long they will live, but annuities shift that risk to the insurer, ensuring financial stability even in very old age, provided that the insurer does not default. Annuities can complement other retirement income sources such as pensions, government benefits, and investment withdrawals. For people without strong pension systems or those who want to ensure that their portfolio does not run out too soon, annuities can provide a reliable source of income.

Benefits and Limitations of Annuities

The benefits of annuities include guaranteed income, protection against longevity risk, and the ability to turn a lump sum into predictable cash flow. They reduce anxiety about market fluctuations, which can be especially comforting during retirement.

The limitations include costs, as annuities often involve significant administrative fees. Optional riders should only be added if they are actually worth the cost in your particular situation. Annuities can lack liquidity, meaning once the money is committed, it cannot easily be withdrawn, or you will be forced to pay very high surrender charges for each premature withdrawal. Additionally, variable annuities expose the annuitant to investment risk, and fixed annuities may lose value in real terms during inflationary periods.

The AXA Annuity Scandal

The annuity industry has definitely not been free from misleading sales-pitches and other sketchy sales practices, and one example of how major players in this enormous industry has prayed on ordinary consumers is the AXA Annuity Scandal.

In 2008-2014, AXA Life Europe engaged in annuity mis-selling that affected thousands of retirees. In the United Kingdom, were AXA Life Europe was major insurer, the insurance company was selling standard annuities to customers who actually qualified for enhanced annuities. Enhanced annuity is a type of annuity that pays a higher income to individuals with health conditions or reduced life expectancy. Many retirees were not aware that their medical history could entitle them to enhanced annuity with significantly better payouts, and AXA did not inform them or even actively assess their eligibility. Consumers were therefore sold annuities that locked them into lower lifetime income, often with no way to reverse the decision once the contract was in force. Some retirees stood to lose tens of thousands of pounds over their retirement as a result of these poor-value products.

After investigations carried out by the FSA (Financial Services Authority) until 2013 and by their predecessor the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) from 2013, AXA finally acknowledged the issue in 2015. For years, a large number of complaints had been raised by affected customers and pension watchdogs, but AXA did not acknowledge the issue or offer any compensation until 2015.

It eventually became clear that AXA was not the only sketchy insurance company doing this in the United Kingdom, and the scandal grew into a bigger wake-up call for consumers considering purchasing annuities. The FCA reacted by imposing stricter rules in an effort to prevent similar cases, and probably also because they wanted to restore some consumer confidence in the annuity industry. Today, insurers in the UK are required to provide better disclosure and ensure that customers are aware of all their options (including enhanced annuities).

In total, more than 90,000 annuity sales across the industry were reviewed, and many customers received redress in the form of compensation or policy adjustments.

The scandal also served as (yet another) wake up call on a larger scale, where consumers were once again confronted with the dangers of poor financial advice and opaque product structures, especially when salespersons calling themselves financial advisors target vulnerable individuals nearing or entering retirement, while abusing the trust that many individuals in the older generation still have for banks, insurance companies, and similar financial institutions. The scandal underscored the importance of transparency, suitability assessments, informed decision-making, and a strong regulatory framework, especially for products like annuities, which are often irreversible and can affect a person’s income for the rest of their life.

AXA Life Europe is closed to new clients since 2016/2017, but the company still manages its existing (“in force”) portfolio of policies.

Understanding the Background

Annuities might feel like a modern invention, but the history of annuities actually goes back over two thousand years. Some of the earliest examples of annuities that we know of are from Ancient Rome, where contracts known as “annua” existed from circa 100 BCE. An individual would pay a lump sum to the Roman government or institutions in return for annual payments for life or for a fixed term. Sounds very similar to modern-day annuities, right? We know a lot about these annua, because Roman jurists wrote down the rules that governed them, and even the famous courtroom advocate Cicero references annua in his writing.

In Medieval Europe, monarchs and cities used annuities to raise funds, particularly for wars. They were often life annuities, promising annual payments for the life of the buyer in exchange for a large upfront payment. Many of these were non-actuarial, meaning they didn’t adjust based on age or life expectancy.

During the Renaissance and the Early Modern Period, the rise of financial mathematics in parts of Europe led to annuities being approached and priced more scientifically. Leading centers for this was the Italian city-states and the Netherlands. Just as in Medieval times, monarchs continued to sell annuities to finance wars, but also certain infrastructure projects.

In the 1600s, tontines became really popular in parts of Europe. A tontine is a hybrid of lottery and annuity, where investor money is pooled and each investor will receive payment until they die. If you are the last investor alive, you receive what ever is left. The tontine was popularized by the Neapolitan banker Lorenzo de Tonti and are named after him. Both England and France used tontines to raise public funds in the 17th and 18th centuries, and they were considered an alternative to taxes and governmental bonds. Notably, tontines actually became very popular in the United States in the 19th century, where they were sold by life insurance companies. After several scandals, law makers clamped down on them. Today, outright tontines are banned in many countries, but some modern retirement products in Canada are actually quite similar to tontines.

Portfolio Insurance

Portfolio insurance is a term used to describe strategies that protect investment accounts from large losses during market downturns. Unlike traditional insurance products sold by life or health insurers, portfolio insurance is built from financial instruments such as options, futures, or structured products. The goal is not to eliminate risk entirely but to create a safety net that limits how much value can be lost in extreme conditions. For both institutions and individual investors, portfolio insurance is most valuable when markets are unstable and the risk of sharp declines is high.

The term “insurance” can be misleading. Make sure you fully understand if you are actually buying some type of guaranteed insurance cover (probably not), or if you are simply getting advice about how to structure investments in a way that may or may not offer some protection during market downturns. Who assumes the risk: you or the insurance company?

How Portfolio Insurance Works

The core principle of portfolio insurance is hedging. Instead of simply holding assets and hoping they rise in value, investors use derivatives to offset potential losses. A common example is buying a put option, which gives the right, but not the obligation, to sell an asset at a predetermined price. If the market falls sharply, the put option gains value, reducing the overall loss in the portfolio. Futures contracts and structured products can serve similar purposes. By taking positions that move in the opposite direction of core holdings, investors create a buffer against declines. The degree of protection depends on how much of the portfolio is hedged and the instruments chosen.

Institutional vs. Retail Use

Portfolio insurance first gained popularity in the 1980s when institutional investors sought ways to protect large pools of capital without selling assets outright. For pension funds, mutual funds, and insurance companies, sudden market crashes can wipe out years of accumulated value. By adopting hedging strategies, they can remain invested in growth assets while still guarding against catastrophic losses. Institutions still remain the largest users of portfolio insurance, but portfolio insurance techniques are also available to retail traders who can apply the same concepts on a smaller scale. However, effective use requires deep and extensive knowledge of derivatives, pricing models, and risk management.

Benefits of Portfolio Insurance

One of the key benefits is downside protection. Investors can continue participating in markets without the constant fear of losing everything during a downturn. This is especially important for funds with obligations, such as pensions that must meet future payouts regardless of market conditions.

Another benefit is flexibility. Unlike selling assets and moving to cash, which removes exposure to future gains, portfolio insurance allows investors to remain invested. If markets recover after a decline, insured portfolios can still capture upside potential while having been protected during the fall.

Portfolio insurance also provides psychological stability. Market crashes often trigger panic selling, which realizes losses. Knowing that protections are in place helps investors remain disciplined, reducing the risk of emotional decisions that harm long-term returns.

Limitations and Costs

A main limitation of portfolio insurance is cost. Options and futures require premiums or margin, which reduce overall returns. Maintaining consistent hedges can be expensive, especially in calm markets where insurance may never be “used.” Over time, these costs accumulate, which is why some investors only adopt portfolio insurance during periods of heightened volatility.

Another limitation is complexity. Designing effective hedging strategies requires expertise in financial markets and an understanding of how different instruments behave under stress. Poorly structured protection can fail to provide adequate coverage or, worse, add risk rather than reduce it. If you want to see real-world numbers on how puts, collars and futures hedges alter risk-to-reward, the free option calculators at DayTrading.com let you plug in strike prices, expiry dates and implied volatility before you risk capital.

Finally, portfolio insurance does not remove all losses. It is designed to limit downside, not guarantee complete protection. Investors must decide how much risk to hedge and accept that partial exposure to declines will remain.

Deposit, Investor, and Trader Protection Schemes

Not all financial protection comes from private insurance products. In many developed economies, governments provide safety nets to protect savers, investors and financial traders from institutional failures. These protections are designed to maintain confidence in the financial system, ensuring that individuals are not left entirely vulnerable if a bank or licensed broker collapses.

Important: These schemes do not guard against poor investment performance or market downturns, they only provide essential security against risks associated with a financial institution or broker failing.

These protections serve two key purposes. First, they protect individuals from total financial loss caused by institutional collapse. Without them, a bank or broker failure could erase savings and investments held by ordinary people, or money and assets kept in a trading account. Second, they build trust in the financial system. Knowing that deposits and brokerage accounts have a safety net encourages participation in the formal financial sector, which strengthens overall stability. If there are rumors about a bank failing, there is less likely to be a bank run if bank depositors trust the government to reimburse them.

Deposit Insurance (“Bank Guarantee”)

Deposit insurance is one of the most widely recognized forms of government-backed protection and it exists in many countries around the globe. The common thread across these programs is that they act as a government guarantee, reassuring savers that their money will not vanish if a bank becomes insolvent. Depositor trust in the schemes largely depend on their general trust in the government/state.

USA

In the United States, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) guarantees deposits held at insured banks up to a set limit per depositor, per bank, and per ownership category. As of today, that limit is $250,000. If a bank fails, depositors are reimbursed quickly, ensuring that savings are not lost.

UK

The United Kingdom operates a similar framework through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS). Under this scheme, cash deposits at licensed banks, building societies, and credit unions are protected up to £85,000 per person, per institution. The FSCS also provides coverage for joint accounts at higher limits, reflecting the combined ownership.

EU

Other regions have equivalent systems. In the European Union, for example, member states are required to operate deposit guarantee that fulfill certain minimum requirements, in accordance with the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive (DGSD). The coverage limit must be at least €100,000 (or equivalent in local currency) per depositor, per bank. All deposits across accounts at the same bank are aggregated. Each depositor in a joint account is separately entitled to up to €100,000. All currencies are covered, so this is not a scheme limited to accounts denominated in Euro. To fortify trust in the system, the European Union has now shortened the payout deadlines and governments are required to compensate depositors within 7 working days after financial institution failure. Note: Deposits related to certain life events (sale of home or other real estate, retirement, marriage, etc.) may be protected above €100,000 for a limited period depending on national implementation.

Investor Compensation Schemes

Beyond deposits, some jurisdictions extend protection to investment accounts, and this protection can also sometimes cover shorter-term trading accounts. It is important that you investigate which rules apply to your particular account types. In some jurisdictions, only retail (non-professional) traders and investors are protected.

These schemes do not provide any protection against normal investment and trading losses; they are only there to safeguard you if a licensed broker or investment firm fails and cannot return client assets. Just as with conventional depositors insurance, the idea is to establish more trust in the formal system available for financial trading and investments.

USA

In the United States, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) covers retail clients of member brokerage firms. The standard protection is up to $500,000 per account, including $250,000 for cash balances. If a brokerage collapses, SIPC works to return securities and funds to clients within those limits.

UK

In the United Kingdom, the FSCS also applies to FCA licensed investment firms and retail investors can be compensated up to £85,000 if an authorized investment provider fails. This cover also extends to shorter-term retail trading accounts with FCA licensed brokers.

For retail traders operating under FCA rules, sites like Investing.co.uk offer step-by-step guides over the local trading landscape.

EU

All EU member states are required to operate investor compensation schemes for retail investment and retail trading accounts, under the EU Investor Compensation Schemes Directive (ICSD), Directive 97/9/EC. These schemes provide a safety net if an investment firm or broker fails financially and is unable to return client funds or financial instruments (e.g. shares, bonds, etc.).

Coverage must be at least up to €20,000 per investor, per firm. The scheme is only valid if the firm is properly licensed to be active within the European Union. This means being licensed by at least one membership country. Example: A firm licensed by CySEC in Cyprus can be active in all the membership countries, since Cyprus is a membership country. The compensation scheme applies to all firms regulated under the MiFID II framework.

While €20,000 is the lower limit established by EU, some countries operate schemes with higher limits. Germany does for instance pay out €20,000 in full, but you can also apply to get at least partial recovery of the amount above this. France pays out up to €70,000 in accordance with the Fonds de Garantie des Dépôts et de Résolution (FGDR). Spain pays out up to €100,000 which is the same cap as for their standard deposit insurance (bank guarantee).

Limitations

Deposit and investor protection schemes are not catch-all guarantees and they do not protect against market risk. If investments lose value due to poor performance, no government scheme will make up the difference. Coverage is also subject to limits, meaning large deposits or portfolios may not be fully protected. Furthermore, protection typically applies only to licensed and regulated institutions; money placed with unregulated or offshore providers may not be eligible for compensation.

If you are residing in country A, but using a bank/investment firm/broker licensed in country B, you might be uncovered, depending on the applicable rules. You could end up in a situation where country A will not cover you, because the firm is not licensed to be active in country A, and Country B will not cover you, because it only protects its own residents. It is important to find out about the rules before you put any money at risk.

Benefits of Financial and Investment Insurance

Insurance in finance is not about chasing higher returns but about making those returns more dependable. Investors face uncertainty from many directions, as markets can swing sharply, economies can slow down, and life events can disrupt even the best-laid financial plans. Adding insurance into the picture is a way of smoothing out these uncertainties so that wealth-building efforts are not undone by a single shock. By integrating mechanisms like portfolio insurance or government-backed guarantees, investors can continue participating in markets while shielding themselves from catastrophic losses. This is particularly important in volatile environments, where sudden downturns can erode years of accumulated growth.

Financial insurance contributes to financial independence. Products like annuities create predictable income streams that remove reliance on market timing in retirement. Investment-linked insurance plans provide both growth opportunities and safety nets, helping individuals strike a balance between ambition and prudence. In every case, the end result is greater control over one’s financial future.

Insurance also provides continuity for families and businesses. A breadwinner’s death or disability can instantly cut off financial support, leaving dependents at risk. With life or investment-linked insurance, there is a payout that can cover expenses, maintain a household, or keep a business operating. For retirement planning, annuities serve a similar role, guaranteeing income even if savings are depleted.

There is also the matter of risk diversification. Investors are familiar with the idea of diversifying across assets (stocks, bonds, real estate, and so on) but fewer think about diversifying across protection methods. Financial insurance is a way of spreading risk management, ensuring that not all vulnerabilities depend on market performance alone.

Another key reason is predictability. Markets are inherently uncertain, but insurance products can introduce fixed or guaranteed elements into a portfolio. A retiree holding an annuity knows that no matter what markets do, income will continue to arrive each month. A family with an investment-linked policy knows that there is coverage in place even if savings underperform. These guarantees reduce stress and make planning more realistic.

Financial insurance can also play a role in estate planning. Life insurance policies not only provide financial coverage during the policyholder’s lifetime but also simplify the transfer of wealth after death. Instead of assets being tied up in lengthy legal processes or subjected to market timing risks, insurance payouts deliver liquidity to families when it is needed most. For individuals with complex estates, insurance offers a straightforward way to ensure dependents receive support without disruption.

Finally, insurance builds confidence. Investors are more likely to remain consistent with their long-term strategies when they know risks are under control. Instead of abandoning investments during downturns, they can stay the course, trusting that insurance mechanisms provide a backstop. In this way, insurance not only protects wealth but also encourages disciplined investing. Knowing that part of a portfolio is insured makes it easier to remain invested through periods of turbulence. Investors are less likely to panic-sell at market lows, which often improves returns over time. Insurance transforms the investment journey from one dominated by fear of loss into one guided by calculated strategy.

The main advantage of financial and investment insurance is that it can provide stability in an environment where uncertainty is unavoidable. While no insurance product can remove risk completely, these tools introduce a layer of security that makes long-term financial planning more reliable. The benefits extend beyond simple protection, touching on growth, family security, and psychological confidence. Markets rise and fall, but investors who hold insurance-based products often have some form of guarantee. A fixed annuity, for example, ensures that income will continue regardless of how stock markets perform. Life insurance with an investment component guarantees a payout to beneficiaries, even if the investment side has underperformed. This protection against worst-case scenarios is what sets insurance apart from pure investments.

Risks and Limitations of Financial and Investment Insurance

While financial and investment insurance provides security and predictability, it is not without drawbacks. These products and strategies come with trade-offs that investors must understand before committing money. In many cases, the cost of protection is the most obvious limitation, but complexity, liquidity issues, and market dependence can also reduce their effectiveness. These risks do not negate the value of financial and investment insurance, but they highlight the importance of due diligence. Understanding costs, terms, and limitations before committing ensures that insurance complements an investment plan rather than becoming an expensive burden.

The first limitation is cost. Insurance products often carry premiums, management fees, and commissions that can erode returns over time. For example, investment-linked insurance plans usually have layered charges for administration, fund management, and policy servicing. Annuities, while offering guaranteed income, may come with lower payout rates because insurers build in their own margins for risk and profit. The peace of mind insurance provides comes at a price, and this cost can make the products less attractive compared with direct investments.

Another concern is complexity. Many financial insurance products are structured with multiple moving parts, blending protection, investment, and payout rules. This complexity makes them difficult to understand for the average investor. Without clear explanation, policyholders may not fully grasp what they are paying for, what returns to expect, or what conditions apply. Misunderstanding the fine print can lead to disappointment or misplaced confidence in guarantees that may not apply in all circumstances.

Market-linked risk also remains in play with many products. Investment-linked policies and variable annuities, for instance, provide insurance coverage but still tie returns to the performance of underlying assets. This means the protective element does not eliminate exposure to volatility. While there may be a minimum payout in some cases, the actual growth depends on market results, leaving investors vulnerable if markets underperform.

Liquidity can also be a limitation. Many insurance-based investments are long-term contracts that lock in funds for extended periods. Withdrawing early often incurs penalties or reduces the benefits significantly. For individuals who may need flexibility to access cash in emergencies, this lack of liquidity can become a serious disadvantage.

Finally, there is the risk of over-reliance Insurance products provide protection, but they should not replace a well-diversified investment strategy. Depending too heavily on them can reduce overall growth potential, especially if investors avoid higher-yielding opportunities out of misplaced caution.

How to Choose the Right Insurance for Your Needs

Selecting an insurance product to complement an investment plan is not about chasing the product with the most features or the highest potential payout. It is about aligning protection with personal financial goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. With a wide range of options available, from simple life policies with savings components to complex investment-linked plans and annuities, careful evaluation is necessary to avoid mismatched expectations.

Choosing the right financial or investment insurance is ultimately about balance. The right product should protect wealth without undermining growth potential, and it should complement other investments rather than compete with them. Careful alignment with goals, risk appetite, and practical needs ensures that insurance works as a tool for stability rather than an unnecessary expense.

Financial Goals

The starting point is an assessment of financial goals. Someone saving for retirement will prioritize different insurance solutions than someone focused on protecting dependents in case of unexpected death. Retirement savers may look at annuities for guaranteed income, while parents with young families may prefer life insurance policies with investment elements that provide both protection and a growing financial cushion. Clarifying the purpose, e.g. income security, wealth transfer, or capital protection, helps narrow down choices.

Time horizon

Time horizon plays an important role. Insurance products are often long-term commitments. Policies with investment components build value slowly, and annuities are structured for years of payouts. If funds may be needed in the short term, tying them up in illiquid insurance contracts is rarely wise. Investors should balance the appeal of guaranteed security against the need for access to cash.

Risk tolerance

Risk tolerance is another deciding factor. Investors comfortable with market swings may opt for investment-linked insurance plans, which provide both coverage and exposure to equities or bonds. Those seeking predictability, however, may prefer fixed annuities or traditional policies that minimize exposure to market performance.

Shop Around

Comparing providers is essential. Costs vary widely across insurers, with differences in premiums, management fees, and surrender charges. A product that appears attractive on the surface may deliver lower net returns once fees are factored in. Reading the fine print, asking for clear explanations, and running long-term projections are all part of making an informed decision. You can compare brokers and providers of financial services at BrokerListings.

Regulation

Regulation and stability of the provider cannot be overlooked. Strictly licensed insurance companies in mature economies are typically subject to oversight and must meet solvency requirements, which reduces the risk of collapse. Checking the financial strength ratings of insurers through independent agencies adds another layer of reassurance. A policy is only as strong as the company behind it, so stability is non-negotiable.

Third-Party Advice

A lot of the financial advisors you will come across are actually salespersons for certain financial products, and commissions, company-wide sales goals, or other incentives will impact their advice. Seeking independent advice, or at least a second opinion, can give you a clearer picture. Insurance products are often marketed aggressively, and sales incentives can lead to biased recommendations. An independent financial advisor, who is not tied to a single provider, can help evaluate options more objectively and tailor solutions to personal circumstances. Be careful though, because there can still be powerful kick-back structures as play even if they do not come from a single source.

The Role of Regulation

Proper regulation and rule enforcement help build and maintain trust in financial and investment insurance. Without effective oversight, policyholders and investors are exposed to risks such as mismanagement of funds, misleading product claims, or even outright fraud. Insurance contracts are often long-term commitments, meaning that buyers rely on providers not just today, but for decades into the future. Strong regulatory frameworks and investor protection schemes are what make that reliance possible.

Regulators can impose strict requirements on capital adequacy, solvency ratios, and financial reporting. The aim is to ensure that insurers always have the resources to honor claims and contractual obligations. For example, in many countries, regulators require insurers to keep customer premiums in segregated accounts and maintain reserves to meet potential payouts.

Investor protection can also extend into to transparency and fair dealings. Regulators can for instance require clear disclosure of product terms, fees, and potential risks. Complex products like investment-linked insurance plans or annuities can be difficult to understand, so disclosure rules are designed to prevent mis-selling. In some jurisdictions, providers are required to present standardized comparison documents to help customers evaluate policies side by side.

Beyond individual companies, governments often back up financial stability through guarantee funds and compensation schemes. In the United States, state guaranty associations protect policyholders if an insurance company fails, while the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) protects bank deposits. In the United Kingdom, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) covers certain insurance and investment products up to defined limits. These schemes do not remove all risk, but they reduce the chance that investors lose everything in the event of provider insolvency.

Regulation cannot prevent all problems, but it creates a system of accountability that significantly lowers the risk of catastrophic loss. For investors and policyholders, this means that financial and investment insurance products purchased through regulated, well-capitalized providers are far safer than those offered by unlicensed or poorly supervised firms. Confidence in insurance, and by extension in long-term financial planning, depends on this regulatory foundation.

Examples of notable regulatory authorities around the world that oversee financial and insurance products, including investment-linked insurance, annuities, and pensions, within their respective jurisdictions:

  • EIOPA (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority). Has a special focus on guidance and harmonization for the membership countries.
  • ESMA (European Securities and Markets Authority). Regulates securities markets, including structured investment products and some insurance-wrapped investments within the European Union. Just as for EIOPA, there is a lot of focus on the harmonization of the legal frameworks of the various membership countries.
  • In the United States, several different regulative entities are a play, and the exact nature of the finance insurance product play a big role. SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) regulates variable annuities and investment-linked insurance products, while FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) oversees broker-dealers who sell insurance products like variable life insurance. There is also NAIC (National Association of Insurance Commissioners), which coordinates state-level insurance regulation. In addition to the nation-wide entities and frameworks, each U.S. state has its own regulator for insurance companies and agents.
  • In Canada, OSFI (Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions) regulates federally incorporated insurers and pension plans, while provincial Regulators (e.g. FSRA in Ontario) oversee insurance and financial advice at the provincial level. The Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) regulates investment products, including those embedded in insurance.
  • In the United Kingdom, the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) regulates financial products, including investment-linked insurance, pensions, and annuities, while the PRA (Prudential Regulation Authority) regulates insurance firms’ solvency and risk. The PRA operates as a subsidiary of the Bank of England, with a distinct statutory role and responsibilities. The Pensions Regulator (TPR) is an official watchdog for workplace pensions, established under the the Pensions Act 2004.
  • In Singapore, MAS (Monetary Authority of Singapore) regulates all financial products and services, including ILPs (Investment-Linked Policies).
  • In Japan, the FSA (Financial Services Agency) regulates insurance, banking, and securities firms.
  • In Australia, ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission) regulates insurance, financial advice, and investment products, while APRA (Australian Prudential Regulation Authority) supervises the solvency and capital adequacy of insurers.
  • In India, IRDAI (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India) regulates all insurance companies and products, while SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) regulates mutual funds, ULIPs, and other investment products.
  • In South Africa, the FSCA (Financial Sector Conduct Authority) regulates market conduct for insurers and investment providers, while the Prudential Authority (within the South African Reserve Bank) supervises insurer solvency and risk.
  • In Kenya, the IRA (Insurance Regulatory Authority) regulates insurance companies and agents.

The Future of Financial and Investment Insurance

Financial and investment insurance is moving through a period of transformation. Demographic changes, technological advances, and shifting economic realities are reshaping how individuals protect their money and how providers design products. While the underlying purpose remains the same, i.e. safeguarding wealth against uncertainty, the ways in which it will be delivered and accessed are changing.

The future of financial and investment insurance is likely to be shaped by digital accessibility, innovative hybrid solutions, retirement-driven demand, stronger regulation, and growing interest in sustainable finance. The sector is evolving from a traditional, paperwork-heavy industry into one that is faster, more inclusive, and more aligned with modern investor needs.

Technology

A major driver of change is technology. The rise of fintech and insurtech has already disrupted banking and payments, and insurance is following the same path. Digital platforms now allow people to research, compare, and purchase insurance products entirely online. Automated systems can assess customer profiles in minutes and recommend suitable policies, reducing barriers to entry. In emerging markets, mobile-based solutions are making investment-linked insurance accessible to people who were once excluded from formal financial systems.

The Struggle Between Complexity and Minimalism

Hybrid products is not something new, but exactly what these hybrids look like have changed over time, and are likely to continue to change, to meet both market demands and regulatory requirements. Right now, investors increasingly demand flexibility, blending insurance with opportunities for growth. This is leading to the development of policies that combine guaranteed minimum benefits with access to investment funds or structured products. For example, some insurers now offer variable annuities that guarantee a minimum payout while still giving policyholders exposure to equity markets. These hybrid structures reflect a growing preference for balance between safety and performance.

At the same time, many consumers have, understandably, grown wary of overly complex products, as they have become associated with exorbitant costs, opaque fee structures, and generally muddy terms and conditions. They are looking for clear and minimalist stand-alone solutions for saving, trading, investing, and insuring, and they want to understand exactly what they are buying and paying for.

Aging Populations

Retirement security will shape the future of the sector as populations age. In developed economies, the pressure on public pension systems is pushing individuals to take greater responsibility for their own retirement planning. In response, insurers are expected to expand annuity offerings, guaranteed income products, and flexible retirement-linked insurance solutions. In emerging economies, the same demographic shifts will drive demand for long-term financial protection, particularly as more people enter the middle class and accumulate wealth.

Consumer Protection

Another change lies in regulation and consumer protection. Regulators are tightening rules to ensure transparency and fairness, and promote faith in the system. Clearer disclosure requirements, stricter solvency standards, and standardized reporting will likely become the norm even on markets where the current situation is different. While this may cut into profits for providers, it will also strengthen trust and stability, which are essential for insurance products that often last decades.

Creditworthiness

Ratings agencies might come to play an even bigger role in investor protection. Independent firms assess the financial strength of insurance companies, publishing ratings that help consumers gauge reliability. A company with a strong rating is more likely to meet its obligations over the long term than one with a weaker financial profile. Checking these ratings might become an even more important step before committing to a policy in the future.