"We champion advice that explores a wider range of outcomes and builds protection portfolios around the percentage of income a client needs to protect, rather than simply a budget."
Paul Roberts
National Friendly’s new report, ‘Bruised Britain 2026: Accidents, Advisers & Access’, has found that while advisers overwhelmingly believe in alternatives to traditional income protection (IP), alternative products are often not included in routine protection conversations.
The report examined the impact of accidents and protection, surveying 100 UK advisers alongside 2,000 UK adults.
National Friendly found that 74% of advisers agree that some income protection, even if more limited, is better than no protection. Only 2% view the value of alternative IP products, like accident-only or short-term income protection, as a barrier to recommending it.
In fact, 61% see these products as a solid fallback when traditional IP isn’t possible, and 45% see it as a stepping-stone to full IP.
Yet these alternative products still remain outside most routine protection conversations. The proportion of advisers who say they ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ discuss or recommend each product is:
81% of advisers say they ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ discuss accident-only IP, 74% say the same for accident, sickness and unemployment cover (ASU), 69% for mortgage payment protection insurance (MPPI), and 48% for short-term accident and sickness IP.
Even when traditional IP isn’t suitable or available, only half of advisers say they ‘often’ or ‘always’ explore an alternative.
Advisers estimate that 23% of clients, nearly one in four, do not take out any other type of policy to protect their income where traditional IP is not suitable or available.
