"The research shows that younger consumers are indeed receptive to income protection, provided the product is presented in a way that reflects their priorities, aspirations and evolving career patterns."
- Natalie Mayne - CIExpert
For years, the insurance industry has held the view that younger consumers are simply not interested in income protection (IP) products. These assumptions have been based on decades of low take-up figures and poor engagement, but our recent Critical Thinking 2026 Report suggests the problem may be less about appetite and more about how protection products are framed.
Low awareness of IP, confusion about what it covers and how it works are rife among younger consumers, with over one in two (53%) of Millennials and Gen Z saying they have not seen or heard anything about IP over the last 12 months.
This lack of exposure points to an industry that is failing to reach its customers and suggests that low engagement is less about apathy and more to do with a failure in communication.
It also suggests that many of these consumers still haven’t been spoken to in a way that helps them understand what income protection is and the benefits it can offer them, rendering them unable to make truly informed protection decisions.
Communication matters
Younger consumers are often accused of having a laissez-faire attitude towards protection, dismissing the need for cover as something they do not need or delay buying until later in life. Yet our research shows that when the facts are communicated effectively, interest in IP spikes significantly among this demographic.
The research found that 51% of Gen Z and 46% of Millennials found IP to be more relevant once they understood the real claims picture, suggesting that their perceived disinterest is more likely due to a lack of awareness and limited knowledge, rather than apathy.
For example, clarifying one of the most common misconceptions about IP – that musculoskeletal issues and mental health conditions account for more claims than cancer, heart attacks and serious physical injuries – helped pique interest and led to a notable increase in the perceived relevance of the cover.
This shows that many young consumers do not instinctively associate IP with everyday health decisions that can prevent them from working, and that once this is clearly communicated, interest in IP among younger generations is immediately heightened.
The importance of framing
The research also suggests that younger consumers respond well when protection products are positioned in a way that feels relevant and purposeful to their lives.
Six in ten Millennials (61%) and Gen Z (59%) say it makes sense to protect their income the same way they save for retirement - by setting aside a small, regular percentage each month. It's a notable finding because it points to a reframing opportunity that moves protection conversations away from the well-worn home-buying trigger towards concepts that actually resonate with younger audiences. For a generation that rents, moves frequently and thinks differently about financial security, the conversation needs to start somewhere new.
Similarly, 58% of Gen Z respondents say they would prefer long-term income protection over short-term alternatives, indicating a genuine appetite for sustained financial coverage rather than a short-term temporary solution. This challenges the assumption that later-life framing only resonates with older clients.
Therefore, clearly communicating the value of IP and its relevance to this demographic is where the industry seems to have fallen short. Younger customers aren’t necessarily indifferent to IP; they simply haven’t been communicated to in the right way.
Flexibility and modern-day careers
One of the most common criticisms of IP is that the product has not kept pace with the realities of the modern workforce, and that the product needs to evolve to better accommodate more varied career paths, multiple jobs and diverse income streams.
The research supports this view.
It found that 42% of Gen Z and 40% of Millennials expect to have mixed or non-linear careers, reflecting the changing nature of the modern-day workforce. This shows that flexibility is no longer considered a 'nice to have', but more of an expectation.
Meeting these needs is crucial as the research shows that consumers value protection that can adapt to their changing work patterns. A total of 39% of Gen Z and 45% of Millennials say they would be more likely to take out a policy if their cover and benefit levels remained unchanged should they decide to work part-time, take a career break or move between employed and self-employed roles.
Flexibility around maternity and paternity leave was also highlighted as a key driver for taking out cover among 20% of Gen Zs. This reinforces the idea that younger customers do value long-term financial security, even if they do not always associate those needs with IP.
What can the industry do?
The research shows that younger consumers are indeed receptive to income protection, provided the product is presented in a way that reflects their priorities, aspirations and evolving career patterns.
Low take-up and the perceived indifference to the product are not necessarily due to apathy, but from gaps in awareness and understanding that stem from ineffective communication and poor messaging about the product.
The research shows that when presented with the realities of claims, the role of IP in supporting long-term financial security and its relevance to modern working lives, levels of engagement and interest increased significantly among both Gen Z and Millennial customers.
Retirement-focused messaging also resonates with younger customers, illustrating how protection conversations are framed is crucial to both consumer understanding and increased take-up of the product.
For insurers and advisers, the opportunity lies perhaps not in convincing younger generations that financial security matters, but instead, in helping them recognise that income protection could be part of a solution that can help them achieve that.
