Life Insurance
Consensus Index

AI Consensus Fit Review

Lincoln Financial Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options Fit Review

Lincoln Financial is a good fit for a U.S.

Research: 2026-09-207 usable platform responsesRead the methodology ↗

Share

Answer Capsule

Lincoln Financial is a good fit for a U.S. buyer who wants permanent Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options, provided the buyer reviews a state-specific illustration before committing. Four of seven platforms named Lincoln Financial during the ranking stage, a 57% share of included platform responses, with an average listed rank of 3.5 and a best rank of 2. The strongest reason to consider it is a current Elite IUL portfolio that supports flexible premium timing, multiple indexed-account choices, and no-lapse guarantee riders. The main limitation is that Lincoln does not publicly disclose complete policy charges, caps, or surrender schedules, so cost comparisons require an illustration.

Research Snapshot

FieldFinding
Platform mentions in ranking stage4 of 7 platforms (anthropic, deepseek, grok, openai)
Share of included platform responses57.1%
Average listed rank3.5
Best listed rank2 (deepseek)
Relevant product/model/planLincoln WealthBuilder IUL, with WealthProtector IUL, WealthAccumulate IUL, WealthAccelerate IUL, and LifeReserve Indexed UL Accumulator named as related products
Overall use-case fitGood, with qualifications; one platform rated it strong, one uncertain, five good
Research date2026-09-20

Why Lincoln Financial Qualified for This Study

Questions This Section Answers

  • Is Lincoln Financial a good choice for Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options?
  • Why did AI platforms include Lincoln Financial in an IUL flexible premium ranking?

Lincoln Financial qualified because four of the seven included platforms named it during ranking discovery for a buyer seeking permanent indexed universal life coverage with adjustable premiums [1]. It was not a unanimous pick: three platforms evaluated the carrier but did not name it in the ranking stage, and one platform rated the overall fit as uncertain rather than good [5].

The strongest qualification signal is product breadth. Independent reviews describe Lincoln as offering five indexed universal life policies, and Lincoln's own materials describe an Elite IUL Portfolio that includes WealthBuilder IUL, launched in the first half of 2025, and WealthProtector IUL, launched in February 2026 [6]. A carrier with multiple current IUL designs is more likely to have a variant matching a specific funding pattern than a carrier with a single product.

Financial scale also supported inclusion. Independent reviews state that as of 2025 Lincoln Financial held $131 billion in general account assets and served over 17 million customers [9]. AM Best affirmed a Financial Strength Rating of A (Excellent) and a Long-Term Issuer Credit Rating of a+ (Excellent) for The Lincoln National life insurance Company on March 13, 2026, with a stable outlook [10].

One platform, kimi, rated the fit uncertain and argued that Lincoln's 2026 IUL specifications, charges, and flexibility mechanics were not verifiable from public sources, while competitors such as Principal, John Hancock, Pacific Life, and Protective publish more explicit terms [13]. That disagreement is preserved in this review rather than averaged away.

The Product, Model, Plan, or Service Most Relevant to Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options

Questions This Section Answers

  • Which Lincoln Financial IUL product should a buyer choose if they need flexible premiums and permanent death benefit protection?
  • Is Lincoln WealthBuilder IUL or Lincoln WealthProtector IUL the better fit for a buyer who wants accumulation versus protection?

The most relevant product for this use case is Lincoln WealthBuilder IUL, with Lincoln WealthProtector IUL as the protection-first alternative and Lincoln WealthAccumulate IUL as an older accumulation-oriented option [17].

WealthBuilder IUL is described in Lincoln's launch material as offering indexed-account choices, allocation flexibility, a 0% floor, non-guaranteed growth, enhanced index strategies, and optional riders with additional charges [17]. Independent product guides describe eight index accounts linked to the S&P 500 or the Fidelity AIM Dividend Index, plus multipliers and bonuses [21]. Lincoln's annual report describes premium and death-benefit flexibility, the requirement for sufficient account value to cover charges, loans and withdrawals, surrender-charge effects, and the recent WealthBuilder and WealthProtector launches [23].

WealthProtector IUL is positioned as a protection-first design with customizable guarantees, simplified indexed-account options, and an Extended No-Lapse Rider that can extend the guarantee up to age 100 [24]. A separate variant, WealthBuilder ECV IUL, is positioned for early cash value, premium finance, and business cases rather than a standard consumer accumulation need [27].

Product naming is genuinely inconsistent across sources. The ranking-stage list included WealthAccumulate IUL, WealthBuilder IUL, WealthProtector IUL, LifeReserve Indexed UL Accumulator, and WealthAccelerate IUL, while current public materials emphasize WealthBuilder and WealthProtector as recent launches [23]. Buyers should confirm which products are currently issued in their state rather than assuming every named product is available.

What the AI Platforms Agreed About

Questions This Section Answers

  • Do AI platforms agree that Lincoln Financial IUL policies allow flexible premium payments?
  • Is Lincoln Financial considered financially strong for a long-term flexible premium IUL policy?

Agreement was strong but not unanimous on four points.

First, flexible premiums. Platforms across the set agreed that Lincoln's universal life designs permit variation in premium timing and amount within policy limits, subject to sufficient account value to cover charges [31]. The NAIC independently explains that flexible-premium universal life permits varying premium payments only when enough value remains to keep the policy in force [37].

Second, indexed crediting with a floor. Platforms agreed that Lincoln's indexed accounts credit interest based on an external index with caps and floors, and that a 0% floor does not guarantee positive policy-value growth because charges continue [38]. The NAIC describes indexed universal life the same way: interest credits link to an external index while policy-specific guarantees and limitations remain [43].

Third, lapse mechanics. Platforms agreed that coverage can expire when no premiums are paid after the initial premium or when later premiums are insufficient, and that a grace period applies [44].

Fourth, financial strength. Multiple platforms cited strong ratings and scale, including the March 2026 AM Best affirmation at A (Excellent) with a stable outlook [49]. One platform cited A+ from AM Best and AA- from S&P, which conflicts with the March 2026 affirmation at A and should be treated as platform-reported and likely stale [53].

Where the AI Platforms Disagreed or Were Uncertain

Questions This Section Answers

  • Why do AI platforms disagree about whether Lincoln Financial IUL charges are competitive?
  • Is Lincoln Financial's IUL pricing transparent enough to compare before applying?

The sharpest disagreement concerns pricing transparency. Grok reported specific figures: a guaranteed 12% premium load in years 1–20 and 5% in years 21 and later up to a threshold, a $6 monthly administrative charge per policy to age 100, and a nine-year surrender charge period [54]. Google reported current premium loads of 9% for years 1–20 under standard thresholds, with 3% to 5% in early years under an early-cash-value option, and 5% for years 21 and later [56]. Perplexity cited older WealthAccumulate IUL material showing a $6 monthly policy fee, premium loads of 7.5% below a threshold and 17.5% above it in years 1–20, 6.0% in years 21 and later, and a nine-year surrender charge period [57].

These figures do not reconcile. They may reflect different products, different product versions, or different issue years. OpenAI stated plainly that no reliable consumer-specific premium quote or complete public fee schedule was identified, and rated pricing confidence low [59]. Kimi reached the same conclusion and rated the overall fit uncertain because Lincoln's 2026 charges, cap rates, and no-lapse terms were not verifiable from public sources [60].

A second disagreement concerns product emphasis. Some sources describe WealthProtector as protection-first, others describe WealthBuilder as accumulation-focused, and one describes WealthBuilder ECV as optimized for premium finance or business use [61]. The right product depends on the buyer's objective, and the sources do not resolve which variant suits a standard consumer best.

A third uncertainty concerns in-force rate history. One independent analysis states that Lincoln has adjusted declared rates on in-force policies in the past, reflecting standard industry practice of prioritizing new products [64]. That claim is platform-reported and not corroborated by the other sources reviewed.

A fourth uncertainty concerns geography. Independent reviews state that Lincoln Financial life insurance products are available in 49 states, excluding New York, and Lincoln's own product pages state that WealthAccumulate 2 IUL and WealthAccelerate IUL are not available in New York and that some products are not for use in Massachusetts [65].

Use-Case-Specific Features and Capabilities

Questions This Section Answers

  • What features does Lincoln Financial offer for a buyer who needs to adjust IUL premiums as income changes?
  • Does Lincoln Financial offer a no-lapse guarantee rider on its flexible premium IUL policies?

Premium flexibility is the core match. Lincoln states that its universal-life policies generally allow flexibility in the timing and amount of premiums, but the policy remains dependent on sufficient account value to cover cost-of-insurance and expense charges [69]. Independent reviews describe flexible premiums and death benefits as a hallmark of universal policies such as IUL, and note that death benefit adjustments are possible after the first policy year, with a medical exam potentially required to increase coverage [70].

Indexed-account choice is the second match. WealthBuilder IUL offers multiple indexed-account options, including traditional and volatility-controlled strategies, and allows policyholders to allocate among options and switch as circumstances change [73]. Independent reviews name S&P 500 Traditional, S&P 500 Dynamic Intraday, and Fidelity AIM Dividend indexed accounts [74]. Caps and floors limit both volatility and upside potential [76].

No-lapse protection is the third match. Independent reviews state that Lincoln offers no-lapse guarantee riders that keep policies active as long as premiums are paid [79]. Google reported a standard 10-year no-lapse guarantee plus an Extended No-Lapse Rider II that guarantees coverage up to age 100 based on cumulative minimum monthly premium amounts [81]. Grok reported a 10-year no-lapse guarantee option on WealthBuilder IUL [83].

Liquidity features are the fourth match. Lincoln materials identify policy loans and partial withdrawals as contractual liquidity features, with access reduced by surrender charges and outstanding loan balances, and Lincoln's loan form lists product-specific loan types and indexed loan accounts for WealthBuilder IUL [69]. Loan account values and withdrawals reduce cash value and death benefit and may cause the policy to lapse [85].

Pricing, Fees, Contracts, and Ongoing Costs

Questions This Section Answers

  • How much does Lincoln Financial IUL cost per month, and what premium loads and policy fees apply?
  • What surrender charge period applies to a Lincoln Financial flexible premium IUL policy?

No reliable consumer-specific premium quote or complete public fee schedule was identified for Lincoln's current IUL products [87]. Premiums depend on age, health, underwriting class, face amount, death-benefit option, funding pattern, riders, and state [87].

Reported cost components, which conflict across sources, include:

Cost componentReported figuresSource
Premium load, years 1–2012% guaranteed up to threshold (grok); 9% current under standard thresholds (google); 7.5% below threshold and 17.5% above in older material (perplexity),,
Premium load, years 21+5% (grok, google); 6.0% in older material (perplexity),,
Monthly administrative charge$6 per policy to age 100 (grok); $6 monthly policy fee, $72 annually, in older material (perplexity),
Surrender charge period9 years (grok, perplexity),
Cost of insuranceMonthly deduction from cash value, rising with age,
Rider chargesPerformance Multiplier Rider and other optional riders carry additional charges,

Industry-wide context, not Lincoln-specific, is that IUL fees range from 2% to 4% annually and first-year fees can consume 30% to 50% of premium [90]. Those figures are labeled inferred by the source and should not be applied to Lincoln without an illustration.

Contract terms reported across platforms include a free-look period typically of 10 to 30 days depending on state, surrender charges that decline over a stated period, lapse if cash value is insufficient to cover monthly deductions, and a grace period of at least 60 days under the applicable flexible premium adjustable life standards [92]. One independent review reported that Lincoln's rates run 5% to 8% below average for $750,000 and $1,000,000 policies but trend above average for $100,000 policies [95].

Best Suited For

Questions This Section Answers

  • Who is Lincoln Financial best suited for among buyers of flexible premium indexed universal life insurance?

Lincoln Financial is best suited for buyers who need permanent death-benefit protection and expect to vary premium payments within contractual limits [96]. It also suits buyers who value several indexed-account and loan-account choices and are willing to monitor policy performance rather than set and forget [98]. It fits buyers comfortable comparing a detailed guaranteed and non-guaranteed illustration instead of relying on headline index-return assumptions [96].

It also fits buyers who want a protection-first design with a customizable guarantee, which points to WealthProtector IUL, and buyers who want accumulation-oriented indexed crediting with a 0% floor, which points to WealthBuilder IUL [101]. Pre-retirees and business owners seeking downside protection while maintaining index-linked growth potential were also named as a fit group [104].

Probably Not Best Suited For

Questions This Section Answers

  • Who should not choose Lincoln Financial for Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options?

Buyers seeking simple, guaranteed premiums and cash values are not well served here; a participating whole life policy may be a better match [106]. Buyers who cannot reliably fund the policy when account value is insufficient to cover insurance and policy charges should avoid flexible premium IUL entirely [106].

Consumers primarily seeking low-cost investment exposure rather than permanent life insurance are also a poor fit [106]. Buyers who want maximum market upside without caps on index-linked growth should look elsewhere, because Lincoln's indexed accounts have caps and floors that limit both volatility and upside [109]. New York residents cannot access these products, and some products are not available in Massachusetts [111].

Buyers who need fully transparent, easy-to-compare policy charges before applying are a weak fit, because Lincoln does not publicly disclose complete charge schedules [114]. Buyers who do not want to work with a licensed financial professional are also a poor fit, since Lincoln policies are distributed exclusively through licensed financial professionals and independent brokers [116].

When Another Option May Be Better

Questions This Section Answers

  • What is a better alternative to Lincoln Financial for a buyer who needs transparent published IUL charges?
  • When should a buyer choose whole life or term life instead of a Lincoln Financial flexible premium IUL?

A buyer who prioritizes guaranteed premiums and predictable cash values may be better served by a participating whole life carrier [117]. A buyer who wants lower-cost temporary death-benefit protection should consider term life insurance [117].

A buyer who wants direct market participation and accepts investment volatility may find variable universal life more suitable, subject to securities and investment risks [117]. A buyer who wants a guaranteed minimum interest crediting rate above 0% may prefer traditional fixed-rate universal life [120].

A buyer who needs transparent published charges before engaging an agent may prefer carriers that disclose explicit terms. Kimi named Principal IUL Flex II for lower charges without persistency bonuses or index multipliers, John Hancock Protection IUL for disclosed premium charges of 35% in years 1–10 and 32% in years 11 and later with a $15 monthly policy fee, Pacific Life Trident IUL for documented 4- to 20-year no-lapse protection with an optional lifetime rider, and Protective Indexed Choice UL for proportional deduction methodology [122]. Those comparisons are platform-reported and were not independently verified.

A buyer who wants to optimize for lowest charges, strongest guarantees, or maximum accumulation should compare current illustrations and contracts from several established IUL carriers rather than selecting Lincoln solely from product descriptions [117].

Questions to Verify Before Buying

Questions This Section Answers

  • What should a buyer confirm with Lincoln Financial before signing a flexible premium IUL contract?

Ask for the guaranteed and non-guaranteed values at the proposed premium, at a reduced premium, and at a skipped-premium scenario [127]. Ask what minimum premium is required each year to avoid lapse under the selected death-benefit option, and how the no-lapse guarantee interacts with reduced funding [127].

Ask for current and guaranteed cost-of-insurance rates, premium loads, administrative charges, and surrender charges in writing [127]. Ask which caps, participation rates, spreads, bonuses, and indexed-account crediting methods apply, and whether Lincoln can change them [127].

Ask how fixed, participating, and indexed loans affect credited interest, policy value, death benefit, and lapse risk, and what the loan interest rate is [133]. Ask about the tax consequences of withdrawals, loans, surrender, or lapse with an outstanding loan, and whether overfunding could create Modified Endowment Contract status [135].

Ask whether the proposed product and every selected rider are available in your state, and request Lincoln's current financial-strength ratings from multiple recognized rating agencies [137]. Finally, ask how the Lincoln illustration compares with at least two competing IUL illustrations using identical assumptions [127].

Final AI Consensus Verdict

Lincoln Financial is a good, but product- and illustration-dependent, fit for a U.S. consumer seeking permanent indexed universal life with flexible premiums [140]. Five platforms rated the fit good, one rated it strong, and one rated it uncertain [145]. Four of seven platforms named Lincoln during ranking discovery, at an average listed rank of 3.5 and a best rank of 2.

The case for Lincoln rests on a current Elite IUL portfolio with genuine premium flexibility, multiple indexed-account choices, a 0% indexed-crediting floor, no-lapse guarantee riders, and a carrier with an A (Excellent) AM Best rating affirmed in March 2026 [147]. The case against defaulting to Lincoln rests on undisclosed policy charges, conflicting reported fee figures, capped upside, lapse risk under reduced funding, and unavailability in New York [140].

AI-platform agreement does not prove product quality. The public evidence is insufficient to conclude that Lincoln is the best-value or strongest-guarantee option across all buyers [140]. Buyers should proceed only after reviewing state-specific contract forms, guaranteed values, lapse testing, all charges, and loan mechanics. For a broader view of how this carrier compares with others in the same category, see the Indexed Universal Life Insurance With Flexible Premium Options consensus index.

Buyers who want to compare Lincoln against other permanent coverage structures can also review the wider life insurance category directory.

How This Review Was Produced

This review was produced from a fixed research run dated 2026-09-20. Seven AI platforms evaluated Lincoln Financial against a single buyer prompt describing a consumer who wants permanent indexed universal life insurance with adjustable premiums, strong death-benefit protection, cash-value potential, reasonable policy charges, a financially established carrier, and clearly explained requirements for keeping the policy in force. Four of the seven platforms named Lincoln Financial during ranking discovery. All seven produced fit assessments, product identifications, pricing notes, and verification questions.

Platform-reported research dates differ from the authoritative run date: anthropic, google, grok, kimi, openai, and perplexity reported 2026-09-21, while deepseek reported 2026-06-01. Those dates are provenance metadata and do not independently prove freshness. Deepseek ran with search disabled, so its claims are model-reported rather than retrieved.

Methodology Limitations

The supplied URLs were collected from platform responses and were not independently validated by the writer stage. Citations are platform-reported evidence, not independently verified facts. No-search model claims require explicit verification before being described as current facts.

Platform-reported pricing figures for Lincoln IUL products conflict across sources and could not be reconciled. Reported premium loads ranged from 7.5% to 12% in years 1–20 depending on the source and product version. No complete, current, state-specific fee schedule or buyer-specific quote was available from the sources reviewed.

Financial-strength and complaint comparisons were not independently established in the sources reviewed. One platform cited A+ from AM Best and AA- from S&P, which conflicts with the March 2026 AM Best affirmation at A (Excellent) and appears stale. Product naming is inconsistent across the ranking stage and current public materials, and the precise availability of every listed product in 2026 is unclear. Some sources cite Lincoln Financial alongside firms with broader IUL litigation involving fee disputes and illustration accuracy, but no specific Lincoln Financial IUL disputes were identified in the search results reviewed.

From the index

Compare the adjacent findings before forming a view.

Sources

Company-Owned Sources

Independent Sources

Other Sources

  • LCN-7530548-011425: https://leadersgroup.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Lincoln_WealthBuilder.pdf
  • Lincoln Rider Reference Guide: https://lincolnfinancial.webdamdb.com/embed/document/11223
  • Lincoln WealthBuilder IUL Product Guide: https://lincolnfinancial.webdamdb.com/embed/document/12345
  • Lincoln WealthBuilder ECV IUL Fact Sheet: https://lincolnfinancial.webdamdb.com/embed/document/67890
  • Lincoln WealthBuilder IUL product guide (PDF: https://mylionstreet.com/media/Leader-article_WealthBuilder66.pdf
  • Lincoln WealthAccumulate® 2 IUL (2020) with the: https://ncoil.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/13193_116470666-Lincoln.pdf
  • Lincoln National Corporation Annual Report (Form 10-K: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/59558/000005955826000010/lnc-20251231.htm
  • Additional AI research evidence154 records
    1. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    2. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    3. AI research evidence record deepseek:c1
    4. AI research evidence record grok:0
    5. AI research evidence record kimi:lincoln-press-release
    6. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-3
    7. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-3
    8. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    9. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-14
    10. AI research evidence record anthropic:29-1
    11. AI research evidence record anthropic:30-1
    12. AI research evidence record anthropic:37-9
    13. AI research evidence record kimi:principal-iul-flex-highlights
    14. AI research evidence record kimi:john-hancock-protection-iul
    15. AI research evidence record kimi:pacific-life-trident
    16. AI research evidence record kimi:protective-indexed-choice
    17. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    18. AI research evidence record perplexity:c2
    19. AI research evidence record perplexity:c3
    20. AI research evidence record anthropic:12-1
    21. AI research evidence record google:1.2.4
    22. AI research evidence record grok:3
    23. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    24. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-1
    25. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-5
    26. AI research evidence record perplexity:c4
    27. AI research evidence record perplexity:c6
    28. AI research evidence record google:1.2.5
    29. AI research evidence record anthropic:8-2
    30. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-7
    31. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    32. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    33. AI research evidence record anthropic:23-6
    34. AI research evidence record deepseek:c1
    35. AI research evidence record grok:1
    36. AI research evidence record google:1.1.7
    37. AI research evidence record openai:c5
    38. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    39. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-8
    40. AI research evidence record anthropic:38-12
    41. AI research evidence record anthropic:38-14
    42. AI research evidence record deepseek:c4
    43. AI research evidence record openai:c6
    44. AI research evidence record openai:c2
    45. AI research evidence record anthropic:10-10
    46. AI research evidence record anthropic:42-1
    47. AI research evidence record anthropic:42-2
    48. AI research evidence record perplexity:c2
    49. AI research evidence record anthropic:29-1
    50. AI research evidence record anthropic:30-1
    51. AI research evidence record anthropic:37-9
    52. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-14
    53. AI research evidence record deepseek:c3
    54. AI research evidence record grok:1
    55. AI research evidence record grok:6
    56. AI research evidence record google:2.1.6
    57. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    58. AI research evidence record perplexity:c9
    59. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    60. AI research evidence record kimi:lincoln-press-release
    61. AI research evidence record perplexity:c2
    62. AI research evidence record perplexity:c3
    63. AI research evidence record perplexity:c6
    64. AI research evidence record google:2.1.4
    65. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-15
    66. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-2
    67. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-7
    68. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-8
    69. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    70. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    71. AI research evidence record anthropic:23-6
    72. AI research evidence record anthropic:23-7
    73. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    74. AI research evidence record anthropic:2-8
    75. AI research evidence record anthropic:2-11
    76. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-8
    77. AI research evidence record anthropic:19-3
    78. AI research evidence record anthropic:21-3
    79. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-1
    80. AI research evidence record anthropic:23-5
    81. AI research evidence record google:1.1.7
    82. AI research evidence record google:2.2.9
    83. AI research evidence record grok:1
    84. AI research evidence record openai:c4
    85. AI research evidence record anthropic:4-10
    86. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-20
    87. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    88. AI research evidence record kimi:lincoln-press-release
    89. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-14
    90. AI research evidence record anthropic:25-1
    91. AI research evidence record anthropic:25-29
    92. AI research evidence record deepseek:c5
    93. AI research evidence record anthropic:42-1
    94. AI research evidence record anthropic:42-2
    95. AI research evidence record google:2.1.8
    96. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    97. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    98. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    99. AI research evidence record anthropic:2-8
    100. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    101. AI research evidence record perplexity:c2
    102. AI research evidence record perplexity:c3
    103. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-5
    104. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-14
    105. AI research evidence record google:1.2.5
    106. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    107. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    108. AI research evidence record anthropic:42-1
    109. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-8
    110. AI research evidence record anthropic:19-3
    111. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-15
    112. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-2
    113. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-8
    114. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    115. AI research evidence record kimi:lincoln-press-release
    116. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-16
    117. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    118. AI research evidence record anthropic:1-2
    119. AI research evidence record deepseek:c5
    120. AI research evidence record anthropic:38-12
    121. AI research evidence record anthropic:38-14
    122. AI research evidence record kimi:principal-iul-flex-highlights
    123. AI research evidence record kimi:john-hancock-protection-iul
    124. AI research evidence record kimi:pacific-life-trident
    125. AI research evidence record kimi:protective-indexed-choice
    126. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    127. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    128. AI research evidence record grok:1
    129. AI research evidence record google:2.2.9
    130. AI research evidence record anthropic:25-1
    131. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    132. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-8
    133. AI research evidence record openai:c4
    134. AI research evidence record anthropic:4-10
    135. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-20
    136. AI research evidence record deepseek:c5
    137. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-15
    138. AI research evidence record anthropic:11-8
    139. AI research evidence record anthropic:29-1
    140. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    141. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-14
    142. AI research evidence record deepseek:c1
    143. AI research evidence record grok:0
    144. AI research evidence record perplexity:c2
    145. AI research evidence record google:1.1.1
    146. AI research evidence record kimi:lincoln-press-release
    147. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    148. AI research evidence record anthropic:5-5
    149. AI research evidence record anthropic:29-1
    150. AI research evidence record anthropic:30-1
    151. AI research evidence record grok:1
    152. AI research evidence record google:2.1.6
    153. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    154. AI research evidence record anthropic:3-15

Verify this research

Check when the research was run, which platforms were included, and what supports the findings.

Study date
September 20, 2026
Platforms analyzed
7
Source records
57
Ranking mentions
4 of 7
Platform share
57%
Final consensus rank
#4

Behind the findings

Platforms in this study

  • ChatGPT
  • Claude
  • DeepSeek
  • Grok
  • Perplexity
  • Kimi
  • Gemini

Source records

26 independent · 24 company-owned · 7 unclear

Evidence support

50 direct · 5 partial

Keep in mind

Use the run research_date as the study date. Platform-reported dates are provenance metadata and do not independently prove freshness.

Technical verification details

Use this SHA-256 fingerprint to identify the source snapshot associated with this study.

11ae5c5ed15fa504150bb2129df4b1327f435c717230d8a8924b03bca024a47a