Best Indexed Universal Life Insurance for Supplemental Retirement Planning

Research Snapshot

• Topic: Indexed universal life insurance for supplemental retirement planning.
• Target buyer: A consumer considering IUL as one component of a broader long-term retirement strategy, wanting permanent coverage and potential cash value accessible through policy withdrawals or loans, while understanding that performance is not guaranteed and poor funding or excessive loans create risks.
• Platforms included (7): openai, anthropic, deepseek, grok, perplexity, kimi, google.
• Research date: 2026-09-20 (authoritative run date). Platform-reported dates ranged from 2025-01-10 to 2026-09-21 and are provenance metadata only.
• Unique entities named: 23.
• Qualifying entities: 9 (named by at least two platforms).
• Eligibility rule: An entity qualified only if it was named by at least two of the 7 platforms during ranking discovery.
• Ranking rule: Order is based on platform mentions, then average listed rank, then best listed rank, per the supplied final ranking table.
• Method: One standardized prompt sent once to each included platform. Platform mentions count only ranking-discovery mentions, not the number of platforms that later completed a fit assessment.

The Consensus Ranking

Questions This Section Answers

• What are the best indexed universal life insurance carriers for supplemental retirement planning in 2026?
• Which IUL carriers did the most AI platforms recommend for building cash value toward retirement?

The table below is the authoritative ranking for this study. Platform mentions count only platforms that named the entity during ranking discovery; share of platform responses is mentions divided by 7 platforms.

Which Option Is Best for Which Version of the Buyer Need?

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL carrier should a buyer choose for supplemental retirement planning if they need a no-lapse guarantee and design flexibility?
• Is Nationwide or Pacific Life better for IUL supplemental retirement planning when carrier scale and complaint history matter?
• Which IUL carrier is best for a buyer who wants index-lock features and premium bonus tiers?

Different buyers need different things from the same product category. The table below maps buyer situations to the carriers the platform evidence most directly supports, using only the supplied ranking and evidence bundles.

1. Nationwide

Questions This Section Answers

• Is Nationwide worth it for indexed universal life insurance used for supplemental retirement planning, and what are its main drawbacks?
• Which Nationwide IUL features matter most for a buyer who wants to access cash value through policy loans in retirement?

Verdict. Nationwide ranks first because it was the only carrier named by all 7 platforms and it held the best average listed position (1.71) with a best position of 1. Platform fit ratings were "good" across openai, anthropic, deepseek, grok, google, and perplexity, with kimi rating it "uncertain" ^[1]. The most relevant product is Nationwide Indexed UL Accumulator III, with earlier generations including Accumulator II and New Heights IUL II ^[2].

Why it ranked here. Nationwide received 7 of 7 possible mentions and the strongest average position in the study. Platforms converged on its accumulation-oriented design: multiple indexed strategies including S&P 500, Nasdaq-100, a multi-index blend, and BNP Paribas Global H-Factor strategies, plus an 8% Enhanced DCA rate in year one and an optional Performance Lock feature ^[4]. Google reported a contractual 2% annual growth floor on accumulated value upon surrender or death, and a tiered premium load of 8% in year one and 6% thereafter ^[8].

Best suited for. Buyers with a genuine permanent-insurance need, sufficient cash flow for long-term premiums, and a long time horizon who want cash-value access through policy withdrawals or loans and accept non-guaranteed crediting, insurance charges, and lapse risk ^[4].

Main strengths for the use case. Purpose-built accumulation design with permanent death-benefit protection; a broad indexed-strategy menu plus a fixed-interest option; Enhanced DCA and Performance Lock to manage initial allocation and protect selected gains; optional overloan-lapse protection; and a Long-Term Care Rider II on Accumulator III ^[4]. One platform cited independent commentary that Nationwide "tends to price and illustrate IUL in a straightforward way compared with carriers that lean on stacked bonuses or aggressive illustrated rates" ^[11].

Main limitations. Cash-value growth, retirement income, and index crediting are not guaranteed; insurance costs, rider charges, spreads, and caps can materially reduce accumulation; poor funding or excessive loans can cause lapse with possible tax consequences ^[4]. Cost-of-insurance charges escalate with age and are not guaranteed ^[12].

2. Pacific Life

Questions This Section Answers

• Is Pacific Life or Nationwide better for IUL supplemental retirement planning when a no-lapse guarantee matters?
• Is Pacific Life worth it for indexed universal life insurance if the buyer wants multiple coverage design profiles?

Verdict. Pacific Life ranks second with 7 of 7 mentions but a weaker average listed position (4.71) than Nationwide, reflecting that platforms named it consistently but often placed it lower. Fit ratings were "good" on five platforms and "strong" on grok and google ^[13]. The flagship product is Pacific Horizon IUL 2, with Trident IUL and the Pacific Indexed Accumulator series also referenced ^[15].

Why it ranked here. Pacific Life was named by every platform and drew the second-highest average position among the two 100%-mention carriers. Platforms emphasized its no-lapse guarantee to age 90 on eligible policies with an optional lifetime extension, three coverage design profiles (Enhanced Early Surrender Value, Balanced, Long-Term Performance), and a 0% floor on indexed accounts ^[17]. One platform cited Pacific Life as the number one seller of indexed universal life insurance in the United States and market leader in IUL sales for 13 consecutive years ^[19].

Best suited for. Consumers with a genuine permanent death-benefit need in addition to retirement objectives who can fund consistently and accept that cash-value results are not guaranteed ^[21].

Main strengths for the use case. Direct alignment with a supplemental-retirement-income use case in Pacific Life's own materials; permanent death-benefit coverage combined with cash-value access; indexed-account upside with protection from index-based losses; multiple coverage designs, indexed-account choices, and loan options; and an elite complaint record — one platform reported a NAIC complaint index of 0.05, lower than a cited competitor's 0.35 ^[21].

Main limitations. Front-loaded policy costs: one platform cited an illustration showing year-one policy charges of 32.40% of accumulated value, dropping to 1.23% by year 10 ^[23]. Index-loss protection does not eliminate charges, surrender costs, lapse risk, or loan-related erosion ^[21]. Pacific Life is not consistently the cap leader — one platform stated other carriers beat it on S&P 500 cap rates in any given month ^[24]. Distribution is agent-only with no direct online enrollment ^[25]. The product is not available in New York ^[26]. .

3. Allianz Life

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL carrier should a buyer choose for supplemental retirement planning if they want index-lock features and premium bonus tiers?
• Is Allianz Life worth it for indexed universal life insurance, and what are its main drawbacks?

Verdict. Allianz Life ranks third with 6 of 7 mentions (85.7%) and an average listed position of 3.17, including two first-place placements from anthropic and google ^[27]. Fit ratings split: "good" on openai, anthropic, deepseek, grok, and google, but "mixed" on kimi and perplexity ^[29]. The flagship product is the Allianz Life Accumulator IUL, launched July 2024 as a replacement for the Pro+ Advantage series ^[31].

Why it ranked here. Allianz was named by six platforms and drew the third-best average position. Platforms highlighted Index Lock and Auto Lock features, three bonus tiers (Classic, Bonused, Select), and participation rates up to 190% on certain indexed allocations ^[32]. One platform described a guaranteed 5% annual loan cost charged in advance while loaned cash maintains index crediting potential ^[35].

Best suited for. A consumer with a genuine permanent death-benefit need in addition to retirement accumulation, financially stable enough to fund for many years and monitor performance, who values indexed-crediting options and flexible access to available cash value ^[36].

Main strengths for the use case. Index Lock and Auto Lock for capturing gains mid-cycle; three bonus tiers enabling customization; a max-funding design intended to maximize cash value without triggering MEC status; strong financial strength ratings (A+ from AM Best, Comdex 94 per one platform); and an Overloan Protection Rider that requires age 75 and 15 years in force to activate ^[33].

Main limitations. The 1% annual asset charge on Select bonus allocations is deducted even in years when the index returns zero ^[33]. Bonused index options typically feature lower base participation rates or caps than non-bonused allocations ^[33]. Policy loans carry a guaranteed 5% annual cost, and arbitrage is not guaranteed during flat market cycles ^[35]. Cash-value growth is not guaranteed and depends on crediting terms, caps, participation rates, charges, and funding ^[36].

Pricing or cost summary. No universal public premium or fee quote was verified.

4. Lincoln Financial

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL carrier should a healthy buyer aged 20–55 choose if they want lab-free underwriting for supplemental retirement planning?
• Is Lincoln Financial worth it for indexed universal life insurance, and what are its main drawbacks?

Verdict. Lincoln Financial ranks fourth with 4 of 7 mentions (57.1%) and an average listed position of 5.00. Fit ratings were "good" on anthropic, deepseek, google, and grok, "mixed" on openai and perplexity, and "uncertain" on kimi ^[40]. The most relevant products are Lincoln WealthAccelerate IUL, WealthAccumulate 2 IUL, and the historically sold LifeReserve Indexed UL Accumulator ^[40].

Why it ranked here. Lincoln was named by four platforms and drew a mid-pack average position. Platforms emphasized its digital-first WealthAccelerate IUL with lab-free underwriting for healthy clients aged 20–55, multiple indexed accounts tied to the S&P 500 and the Fidelity AIM Dividend Index, and a solid AM Best "A" (Excellent) rating with a stable outlook ^[44].

Best suited for. Consumers who need permanent life insurance and can commit to long-term, adequately funded premiums, seeking indexed-account cash-value potential as a secondary retirement resource rather than a replacement for diversified retirement accounts ^[40].

Main strengths for the use case. Explicit positioning for supplemental retirement income; multiple indexed-account approaches including fixed-bonus, multiplier, traditional, and performance-trigger accounts; guaranteed minimum floors (typically 1% per one platform); tax-free policy loans and withdrawals up to basis if the policy is not a MEC; and streamlined underwriting on WealthAccelerate ^[40].

Main limitations. No verified evidence that Lincoln has the lowest total cost or best long-term retirement economics ^[40]. Cost-of-insurance durations were extended to age 121 and current COI rates increased in late 2023 updates ^[52]. Premium loads on WealthAccumulate 2 can reach 12% guaranteed in years 1–20 up to a threshold and 20% above it ^[53]. The more generous 93% and 100% return-of-premium options under the Lincoln Enhanced Value Rider were removed, leaving only the 85% option ^[52]. WealthAccelerate is not available in New York and not for use in Massachusetts ^[40].

Pricing or cost summary. No consumer-facing premium quote was verified.

5. Penn Mutual

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL carrier should a buyer choose for supplemental retirement planning if they want a mutual-company structure and a long no-lapse guarantee?
• Is Penn Mutual worth it for indexed universal life insurance, and what are its main drawbacks?

Verdict. Penn Mutual ranks fifth with only 3 of 7 mentions (42.9%) but the second-best average listed position in the study (2.67) and a best position of 2, reflecting that the platforms that named it placed it very high. Fit ratings were "good" on anthropic, deepseek, grok, and openai, "strong" on google, "mixed" on perplexity, and "uncertain" on kimi ^[54]. The relevant product is Accumulation Indexed Universal Life (AIUL), also marketed as Accumulation Builder IUL ^[57].

Why it ranked here. Penn Mutual's high average position reflects strong platform assessments where it appeared. Platforms highlighted six indexed accounts tied to the S&P 500 with capped and uncapped options and 0% or 1% floors, a guaranteed policy value enhancement beginning in year 1, a no-lapse guarantee up to 30 years or age 85, and both traditional and indexed loan methods ^[59].

Best suited for. Consumers who need permanent death-benefit protection with a long-term supplemental-retirement objective, who can fund consistently and monitor cash value, loan balances, and policy sustainability ^[57].

Main strengths for the use case. Mutual-company structure with a long dividend history; no surrender charges on premium amounts in excess of target premium and no surrender charges after the 9th year per one platform; dual loan structures including a traditional loan with a current net cost of 1% in years 1–5 and 0% in years 6+; and an Overloan Protection Benefit Rider ^[62].

Main limitations. Surrender charge duration is disputed: one source says no charges after 9 years while litigation sources cite charges persisting 10–15 years ^[62]. Unpaid policy loans void the no-lapse guarantee ^[65]. Penn Mutual maintains tight underwriting guidelines ^[66]. The product is not offered in New York ^[57]. One platform cited litigation alleging agents misrepresented illustrative returns and understated fees, which the platform flagged as claim histories rather than verified findings ^[67].

Pricing or cost summary. No public individualized premium quote was verified.

6. North American Company for Life and Health Insurance

Read the full North American Company for Life and Health Insurance fit review for supporting evidence and buying considerations.

Verdict. North American ranks sixth with 2 of 7 mentions (28.6%) but the best average listed position of any qualifying carrier (2.00) and a best position of 2. Fit ratings were "strong" on grok and google, "good" on anthropic, deepseek, and perplexity, "mixed" on openai, and "uncertain" on kimi ^[68]. The relevant product is Builder Plus IUL 4 ^[70].

Why it ranked here. North American's high average position reflects strong platform assessments where it appeared. Platforms highlighted a contractually guaranteed minimum 100% participation rate on standard S&P 500 strategies, a reduced monthly account value charge of 0.0275% in version 4 (down from 0.104%), and multiple loan options including a fixed participating loan with a 2.00% current / 0.50% guaranteed interest bonus starting in year three ^[72].

Best suited for. A buyer with a genuine permanent death-benefit need who wants potential tax-deferred cash-value accumulation, can maintain planned premiums, and values a 0% index-crediting floor before policy charges ^[70].

Main strengths for the use case. Guaranteed 100% S&P 500 participation; reduced monthly asset fees versus the prior version; interest bonuses on both non-loaned funds and loaned cash backing participating loans; accelerated death benefit endorsements for critical, chronic, and terminal illness; and a 10-year surrender charge period, shorter than many competitors ^[72].

Main limitations. Version 4 introduced an increased premium load and longer premium load duration, meaning more early premium is consumed by upfront charges ^[75]. The no-lapse guarantee period was shortened in version 4 ^[77]. Paying only minimum premiums required for the shortened no-lapse guarantee will fail to accumulate cash value ^[77]. One platform reported conflicting NAIC complaint data — 0.37 in one source and 1.21 in another — and flagged the conflict as needing direct verification ^[78]. .

7. Mutual of Omaha

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL carrier should a buyer choose for supplemental retirement planning if they want low internal charges and a capped index-loan cost?
• Is Mutual of Omaha worth it for indexed universal life insurance, and what are its main drawbacks?

Verdict. Mutual of Omaha ranks seventh with 2 of 7 mentions (28.6%) and an average listed position of 4.00. Fit ratings were "strong" on google, "good" on anthropic, grok, and perplexity, "mixed" on openai and deepseek, and "uncertain" on kimi ^[80]. The relevant product is Income Advantage IUL ^[81].

Why it ranked here. Mutual of Omaha was named by two platforms and drew a mid-pack average position. Platforms emphasized a low-charge chassis, four annual point-to-point index crediting strategies, index loans with a current 4% charge and a guaranteed maximum of 6%, and a Guaranteed Refund Option rider available at no extra cost for qualifying standard risk classes ^[80].

Best suited for. Consumers with a genuine permanent death-benefit need who can maintain premiums over a long horizon and are willing to review guaranteed and non-guaranteed illustrations under conservative assumptions ^[81].

Main strengths for the use case. Low cumulative policy charges relative to competitors in one platform's modeling (roughly 18% of paid premiums after 20 years); a capped index-loan charge guaranteed never to exceed 6%; a Guaranteed Refund Option allowing surrender for up to 50% of premiums at year 15 and up to 100% during 60-day windows in years 20–25; and a 0% floor on indexed accounts ^[86].

Main limitations. Surrender charges apply for the first 14 years ^[84]. The Guaranteed Refund Option is restricted for substandard health classes or tobacco users under age 50 ^[80]. Ongoing policy deductions can reduce cash values even when index performance is flat ^[85]. One platform noted that a company producer-only comparison using a hypothetical $20,000 annual premium for 15 years is company-produced, scenario-specific evidence and not independent proof of lowest cost ^[88].

Pricing or cost summary. No consumer-specific premium quote was verified.

8. Protective Indexed Universal Life

See the broader Protective Indexed Universal Life consensus index for comparisons across qualified options.

Verdict. Protective ranks eighth with 2 of 7 mentions (28.6%) and an average listed position of 6.00. Fit ratings were "good" on anthropic, "mixed" on openai, google, and perplexity, "uncertain" on deepseek and kimi, and "weak" on grok ^[89]. The relevant product is Protective Indexed Choice UL ^[90].

Why it ranked here. Protective was named by two platforms and drew the second-lowest average position. The most decision-relevant fact across platforms is that Indexed Choice UL closed to new sales effective March 9, 2026, with all policies required to have been in force by June 5, 2026 ^[93]. Grok rated the fit "weak" for new buyers specifically because of the discontinuation ^[92].

Best suited for. Consumers with a genuine long-term need for permanent death-benefit coverage who have already addressed emergency savings and conventional retirement-plan contributions and want an additional insurance-based cash-value component ^[90]. For new buyers in 2026, the product is not available.

Main strengths for the use case. Permanent coverage through age 121 with no stated maturity age; dual fixed and indexed accounts; a 0% floor on the indexed account; tax-deferred cash-value accumulation; policy loans and partial withdrawals after year one; and a no-cost Terminal Illness Accelerated Death Benefit ^[89].

Main limitations. The product is closed to new sales as of March 9, 2026 ^[93]. A guaranteed 12% premium load applies in years 1–3, declining 1% annually to 5% by year 10 ^[95]. Surrender charges decline over the first 19 years ^[95]. The S&P 500 cap rate was lowered from 9.00% to 8.50% in 2025, and the maximum secondary no-lapse guarantee was reduced from age 121 to age 90 ^[96]. One platform reported a 25% premium load, which conflicts with the 12% figure reported by another platform ^[98].

Pricing or cost summary. No public consumer price was verified.

9. Prudential Indexed Universal Life Insurance

See the broader Prudential Indexed Universal Life Insurance consensus index for comparisons across qualified options.

Verdict. Prudential ranks ninth with 2 of 7 mentions (28.6%) and the lowest average listed position in the study (7.00). Fit ratings were "good" on anthropic and google, "mixed" on openai, deepseek, grok, and perplexity, and "uncertain" on kimi ^[99]. The most-cited product is PruLife Index Advantage UL, which platforms describe as being phased out in favor of Prudential Momentum IUL ^[103].

Why it ranked here. Prudential was named by two platforms and drew the lowest average position. Platforms emphasized the newer Momentum IUL's S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 indexed accounts, a 0% floor, a market-first six-month segment duration option, and an optional Overloan Protection Rider that prevents lapse from substantial outstanding loans for a one-time fee ^[100].

Best suited for. Consumers with a legitimate permanent death-benefit need and a long accumulation horizon who have addressed employer plans, IRAs, emergency reserves, and other core retirement savings, and who are willing to monitor policy performance under adverse crediting or expense scenarios ^[101].

Main strengths for the use case. Permanent death-benefit coverage with cash-value accumulation potential; fixed and indexed crediting choices; a 0% floor on indexed accounts; flexible loan options including participating loans where borrowed funds continue to earn index-linked interest; and strong financial ratings (A+ from AM Best and AA from S&P per one platform) ^[101].

Main limitations. PruLife Index Advantage UL is being phased out and is only available in states that have not yet approved Momentum IUL ^[104]. Index crediting caps (7.50%–9.25% depending on account choice) limit upside participation ^[107]. Heavy funding is required to maximize cash value ^[99]. Unpaid loans become immediately taxable if the policy lapses or is surrendered while the insured is alive ^[108]. MEC risk from heavy funding can make all distributions taxable plus a 10% penalty ^[108].

Pricing or cost summary. No public retail premium quote was verified.

What the Cross-Platform Study Reveals About This Market

Questions This Section Answers

• What does the cross-platform AI consensus reveal about which IUL carriers dominate supplemental retirement planning recommendations?
• How concentrated is AI platform agreement on IUL carriers for supplemental retirement planning?

Three patterns stand out across the 9 qualifying carriers and 7 platforms.

First, consensus is concentrated at the top. Nationwide and Pacific Life were the only carriers named by all 7 platforms, and Allianz Life was named by 6. The remaining six carriers were named by 2 to 4 platforms each. That means the top three carriers captured the overwhelming majority of platform mentions, while the bottom six split the remainder.

Second, mention frequency and average position diverge. North American Company for Life and Health Insurance had the best average listed position of any qualifying carrier (2.00) but only 2 mentions, while Pacific Life had 7 mentions but a 4.71 average position. Penn Mutual similarly had only 3 mentions but a 2.67 average position. Buyers who weight average position heavily may reach different conclusions than buyers who weight breadth of mention. .

Where the AI Platforms Agreed

Questions This Section Answers

• Which IUL features did all AI platforms agree matter most for supplemental retirement planning?

Platforms agreed on several points across carriers.

• Permanent coverage plus cash-value access is the core structure. Every platform described IUL as permanent life insurance with a cash-value component accessible through policy loans or withdrawals subject to policy terms ^[109].
• Indexed crediting is not direct market investment. Platforms consistently noted that indexed accounts credit interest based on index performance subject to caps, participation rates, or spreads, and that policy cash value is not directly invested in the market ^[118].
• A 0% floor does not guarantee positive policy value. Multiple platforms stated that a 0% index-crediting floor applies only to index crediting, not to total policy performance, because charges continue to be deducted ^[119]. .

Where the AI Platforms Disagreed

Questions This Section Answers

• Where did AI platforms disagree most about IUL carriers for supplemental retirement planning?

Platforms disagreed on several material points.

• Fit ratings for the same carrier. Kimi rated Nationwide, Lincoln Financial, Penn Mutual, North American, Mutual of Omaha, and Prudential "uncertain," while other platforms rated the same carriers "good" or "strong" ^[122]. Grok rated Protective "weak" while anthropic rated it "good" ^[128].
• Which product is current. Platforms disagreed on whether Allianz's current flagship is Accumulator IUL or Pro+ Advantage/Elite, whether Lincoln's LifeReserve Indexed UL Accumulator is current or historical, and whether Prudential's current product is PruLife Index Advantage UL or Momentum IUL ^[130].
• Specific fee and rate figures. Platforms reported different premium loads for Protective (12% versus 25%), different IUL Rewards credits for Nationwide (0.10%, 0.20%, and 0.30%), and different fixed rates for Allianz (5.30% versus 5.50%) ^[133]. .

How Buyers Should Choose

Questions This Section Answers

• What should a buyer check before choosing an IUL carrier for supplemental retirement planning?
• Which IUL carrier should a buyer choose if they have not yet maximized 401(k) and IRA contributions?

Buyers should treat this index as a shortlist generator, not a purchase recommendation. The ranking reflects how often AI platforms named a carrier in one standardized prompt, not verified policy economics.

A practical sequence:

1. Confirm the permanent-insurance need first. Every platform bundle states that IUL is insurance first and an accumulation vehicle second, and that buyers without a genuine permanent death-benefit need may be better served by term insurance plus diversified retirement investing ^[140].
2. Maximize conventional retirement accounts first. Platforms repeatedly cited guidance to fully use 401(k), IRA, and similar accounts before funding an IUL ^[149].

Methodology

This index was produced from a single standardized prompt sent once to each of 7 included platforms: openai, anthropic, deepseek, grok, perplexity, kimi, and google. The prompt asked which life insurance carriers the platform would recommend for a consumer considering indexed universal life insurance as one component of a broader long-term retirement strategy, wanting permanent coverage and potential cash value accessible through policy withdrawals or loans, while understanding that policy performance is not guaranteed and poor funding or excessive loans create risks.

Platform responses were parsed into named entities. An entity qualified for the final ranking only if it was named by at least two platforms during ranking discovery. The final ranking order is based on platform mentions, then average listed rank, then best listed rank, exactly as supplied in the final ranking table. Platform mentions count only ranking-discovery mentions; they do not reflect the number of platforms that later completed a fit assessment.

The study date is 2026-09-20, the authoritative run research date. Platform-reported research dates ranged from 2025-01-10 to 2026-09-21 and are provenance metadata only; they do not independently prove freshness.

Citations are platform-reported evidence, not independently verified facts. Company-owned sources materially outnumber independent sources in several entity bundles, and company claims should not be described as independently verified.

Methodology Limitations

• One prompt, one run. The study used one standardized prompt sent once to each included platform. Different wording, timing, or follow-up questions could produce different results.
• AI answers vary. Platform answers can vary by date, wording, location, account state, model, interface, browsing configuration, and the sources retrieved.
• Platform-reported dates differ from the run date. Platform-reported research dates ranged from 2025-01-10 to 2026-09-21, while the authoritative run date is 2026-09-20. These dates are provenance metadata and do not independently prove freshness.
• Mentions are not quality signals. Platform recommendations are market intelligence, not independent customer reviews or proof of product quality.
• Company-owned sources dominate some bundles. For Pacific Life, Allianz Life, and Protective, company-owned citations materially outnumber independent citations. Company claims in those bundles are not independently verified.
• No-search model claims require verification. Deepseek ran without search enabled in this study, so its claims are model-reported and require explicit verification before being described as current facts.
• Conflicting product names, pricing, and capabilities were not resolved. Where platforms disagreed, this report describes the conflict and tells buyers what to verify rather than guessing.
• URLs were not independently validated. The supplied URLs were collected from platform responses and were not independently validated by the writer stage. .

Final Verdict

Nationwide is the consensus leader for indexed universal life insurance used as one component of a supplemental retirement strategy, named by all 7 platforms with the best average listed position (1.71). Pacific Life is the strongest alternative for buyers who prioritize carrier scale, a no-lapse guarantee to age 90, and three coverage design profiles. Allianz Life leads on index-lock and bonus-tier features. Penn Mutual and North American Company for Life and Health Insurance score highest on average listed position among lower-mention carriers, but each was named by only 2 or 3 platforms. Protective Indexed Universal Life is closed to new sales as of March 9, 2026, and Prudential's most-cited product is being phased out in favor of Momentum IUL.

No carrier in this index is a guaranteed retirement-income solution. Every platform bundle states that cash-value growth is not guaranteed, that caps and participation rates can change, that policy charges continue even in zero-crediting years, and that poor funding or excessive loans can cause lapse with possible tax consequences. Buyers should use this index to build a shortlist, then compare guaranteed and non-guaranteed illustrations across at least two or three carriers using identical assumptions before purchasing.