IUL Renewal Cap Rates: Why F&G Looks Stronger Than Pacific Life and Lincoln

Written by: Joshua Wahls, founder of Insurance By Heroes.

Reviewed by: Joshua Wahls, licensed insurance producer, NPN 19191959.

Last reviewed: May 28, 2026

Our process: We review life insurance content for accuracy, state availability, carrier fit, underwriting context, and consumer clarity. See our Editorial Policy, Licensing, and Advertising Disclosure.

If you are comparing indexed universal life insurance, the first-year cap rate is not enough. The more important question is what happens after the policy is already issued. That is where renewal cap rates matter.

Based on the 2012-2023 renewal cap history in the publicly available AdvisorShare PDF, F&G looks materially stronger than Pacific Life and Lincoln Financial for long-term IUL performance potential. Not because one current cap is a little higher. Because F&G’s renewal cap history was consistently stronger across the years that actually matter to an IUL owner.

That distinction is huge. A client does not own an IUL for one year. They may own it for 20, 30, or 40 years. If the renewal caps are cut aggressively after issue, the policy can lose the upside room that was supposed to help cash value recover, compound, and support future charges.

Quick Verdict

F&G had the strongest renewal cap history among these three carriers in the PDF. F&G showed the highest renewal cap in every year reviewed from 2012 through 2023, the highest average renewal cap, the highest lowest-observed renewal cap, and the least cap erosion from 2012 to 2023.

Carrier	2024 cap in PDF	Avg. 2012-2023 renewal cap	Lowest renewal cap	2012 to 2023 cap change	Cap retained by 2023	$100k gross example
F&G	12.00%	14.15%	12.50%	-1.00 pts	92.6%	$303,032
Pacific Life	10.00%	9.96%	7.50%	-5.50 pts	57.7%	$234,834
Lincoln Financial	10.50%	10.04%	5.00%	-8.00 pts	38.5%	$229,816

The 2024 cap is useful, but it is only a snapshot. The stronger evidence is the renewal pattern. F&G averaged about 14.15% across the 2012-2023 renewal cap history, compared with about 9.96% for Pacific Life and about 10.04% for Lincoln Financial. F&G’s lowest observed renewal cap in this table was 12.50%. Pacific Life fell to 7.50%. Lincoln fell to 5.00%.

Cap Rate vs Renewal Cap Rate

A cap rate is the ceiling on the interest credit for an indexed segment. If the policy uses an annual point-to-point strategy with a 0% floor and a 12% cap, the index could rise more than 12%, but the segment would generally be limited to a 12% interest credit before considering the exact policy terms.

A renewal cap rate is the cap the carrier declares when an existing segment renews. This is the part many clients miss. A carrier can look competitive on a new-money or current illustrated cap, but the owner will live with future renewal caps. If those renewal caps are lowered, the policy’s long-term upside can be reduced.

Question	Regular cap-rate thinking	Renewal cap-rate thinking
What does it ask?	What is the cap right now?	What cap did the carrier renew to year after year?
Why does it matter?	It affects the first illustrated year or current segment.	It affects the policy after it is already in force.
Main risk	Chasing a high current rate that may not last.	Ignoring whether the carrier has historically protected in-force policyowners.
Best use	Useful as a current snapshot.	Better for judging long-term IUL credibility.

The Renewal Cap History

This is the table that matters most. Green marks the F&G renewal cap in each year. In this data set, F&G was not barely ahead. It was consistently ahead.

Year	F&G renewal cap	Pacific Life renewal cap	Lincoln Financial renewal cap
2012	13.50%	13.00%	13.00%
2013	14.75%	12.00%	12.00%
2014	15.25%	12.00%	12.00%
2015	14.75%	11.00%	12.00%
2016	14.00%	11.00%	12.00%
2017	14.50%	10.50%	11.50%
2018	15.50%	9.25%	11.50%
2019	14.50%	9.25%	10.00%
2020	14.00%	8.50%	8.00%
2021	13.50%	8.00%	7.00%
2022	13.00%	7.50%	6.50%
2023	12.50%	7.50%	5.00%

Why This Can Matter Over Decades

IUL performance is not just about avoiding negative index years. The 0% floor is valuable, but the policy still needs enough positive crediting over time to overcome policy charges, cost of insurance, rider charges, and the natural drag that can become more important as the insured gets older.

When a carrier renews caps lower, a good index year can become a mediocre crediting year. That matters because strong index years are often when an IUL has the opportunity to rebuild cash value after flat years. If the cap is too low, the policy cannot fully participate in those recoveries.

Here is the practical difference:

• With a 12.50% renewal cap, a strong index year still has meaningful upside room.
• With a 7.50% renewal cap, a strong index year gets cut off much sooner.
• With a 5.00% renewal cap, the policy may struggle to generate enough credited interest in the years when it needs positive performance most.

That is why the renewal cap pattern favors F&G. The table shows F&G held a much higher cap range across the full period. Pacific Life and Lincoln both experienced materially larger cap compression.

The Credited Rate Comparison

The renewal caps also showed up in the annual credited-rate results. In years where the index return was high enough to hit the cap, the carrier with the higher renewal cap had more room to credit.

Year	F&G credited rate	Pacific Life credited rate	Lincoln Financial credited rate
2012	13.41%	13.00%	13.00%
2013	14.75%	12.00%	12.00%
2014	11.38%	11.38%	11.38%
2015	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
2016	9.55%	9.55%	9.55%
2017	14.50%	10.50%	11.50%
2018	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
2019	14.50%	9.25%	10.00%
2020	14.00%	8.50%	8.00%
2021	13.50%	8.00%	7.00%
2022	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
2023	12.50%	7.50%	5.00%
PDF reported CAGR	9.32%	6.47%	6.10%

The PDF reported CAGR figures were 9.32% for F&G, 6.47% for Pacific Life, and 6.10% for Lincoln Financial. The exact policy result for any client would depend on the policy design, charges, premium pattern, rider costs, index allocation, cap declared at the time, and future non-guaranteed elements. But the historical renewal-cap signal is still clear: F&G gave the policy more upside room.

The $100,000 Gross Example

To make the difference easier to see, we ran a simple gross example using the annual credited rates from the PDF. This is not a policy illustration. It does not include premium loads, monthly deductions, cost of insurance, loans, withdrawals, taxes, surrender charges, rider costs, or any other policy expenses. It is only a way to isolate the impact of the credited-rate path.

In that gross example, F&G ended around $303,032, while Pacific Life ended around $234,834 and Lincoln Financial ended around $229,816. That is a roughly $68,000 advantage over Pacific Life and a roughly $73,000 advantage over Lincoln before policy charges.

Why F&G Likely Looks Better for Long-Term IUL

The reason F&G likely looks better is not simply that its 2024 cap was listed at 12% while Pacific Life was listed at 10% and Lincoln at 10.5%. That helps, but it is not the main point.

The main point is renewal discipline. F&G’s renewal cap history suggests the carrier was more willing or able to keep in-force caps higher across different market environments. In a long-term IUL, that can matter more than a single current cap because the owner is depending on future renewal rates for decades.

Pacific Life and Lincoln may still be appropriate in some cases. A final recommendation should always compare the actual illustration, charges, death benefit design, loan provisions, living-benefit riders, underwriting class, state availability, and stress-tested in-force values. But if we are looking specifically at renewal cap behavior, F&G is the clear winner in this data set.

Bottom Line

If the goal is a long-term IUL policy, do not stop at the advertised or current cap rate. Ask for the renewal cap history. Ask how the carrier treated existing policyowners after the policy was issued. Ask what the cap looked like in later years, not just on day one.

Based on this renewal cap data, F&G appears more attractive than Pacific Life and Lincoln Financial for long-term IUL upside potential. The difference is not cosmetic. It is structural: F&G maintained higher renewal caps, experienced less cap erosion, and produced stronger gross credited-rate results in the period reviewed.

Source and compliance note: The renewal-cap chart and carrier data discussed here were taken from AdvisorShare’s public IUL Renewal Cap Download page, which links to this IUL Cap Renewals PDF. Insurance By Heroes did not create the source PDF and is not affiliated with AdvisorShare or OnPointe. This article is an educational review of that third-party data set, not a carrier-approved comparison, not a policy illustration, and not a recommendation by itself. Historical renewal caps, current caps, illustrated rates, participation rates, spreads, policy charges, rider costs, and other non-guaranteed elements can change. Always verify current values directly with the carrier and review a current state-specific illustration and policy contract before making a decision.