Is researching indices an agent’s responsibility?

March 18, 2026 by Sheryl J. Moore

Charlie Gipple, CFP®, CLU®, ChFC® has a lot to say about hybrid indices on indexed insurance products.

He and I are aligned on the fact that 200% of 1% is still just 2%.

Insurance companies like to point-out their uber-high participation rates on these indexes. However, there is very little training on their construction, performance, and use. There IS, however, party line commentary that these indexes will help with the maintenance of inforce renewal rates.

(Don’t get me on the culture of dropping rates in the indexed annuity market! I call it the dirty little secret of the indexed insurance industry. )

So, the insurance company kicks the can down the road.

The marketing organizations, who are focusing on increasing sales, do not provide training on the hybrid index’s construction, performance and use either. There is, however, marketing on the index; it’s potential, it’s backcasted performance, and it’s illustrations.

The marketing organization kicks the can down the road.

The insurance agent is left holding the bag, thinking that the hybrid index will outperform an index like the S&P 500. Why wouldn’t s/he? Everyone knows that a participation rate of 200% is better than a cap rate of 4.5%- right? The illustrated performance of the hybrid index is more favorable than the mainstay S&P 500.

How does the agent stand a chance?

However, the part of this post that REALLY got my attention? Charlie makes a statement in it, which I find to be very provocative. “The IMO is compensated on the sale as well and should be responsible for marketing BS.”

What do you think? Is researching indices the agents’ responsibility? The FMOs? Or, the insurance companies’? -sjm