In many countries, the decline in interest rates has reduced the interest in traditional participating life insurance contracts with investment guarantees and has led to a shift to unit-linked policies without guarantees. We design a novel mixed insurance contract splitting premium payments between a participating and a unit-linked fund. An additional guarantee fee is applied on the unit-linked return in order to increase the investment guarantee of the participating fund. In a utility-based framework, using power utility and prospect theory as preference functions, we show that the mixed product is usually perceived more attractive than a full investment in either the unit-linked or the participating contract. The guarantee fee is beneficial for conservative investors interested in stronger protection against losses. This is also interesting from a marketing perspective: By the increase of the guarantee in the participating product, zero or negative guaranteed rates can be avoided.

In the context of pension plans, the employer and the worker have distinct interests and face different risks. The worker seeks higher retirement benefits, while the employer aims to minimize the cost of fulfilling his obligations. To address these diverse needs, the defined contribution plan managed with participating life insurance (DC-PL) and the cash balance plan managed with unit-linked insurance (CB-UL) serve as suitable choices. The multi-criteria analysis is conducted using the cumulative prospect theory model to measure the utility of the parties involved toward a mixed product combining these two pension plans. By assigning weights to risk measures and maximizing utilities, the paper employs both additive utility and Nash equilibrium approaches. The results reveal that the CB-UL plan aligns with employers’ interests, offering potential financial gains, while the DC-PL plan attracts workers due to its profit-sharing aspect. Significantly, when equal importance is given to both parties, the CB-UL plan emerges as the prevailing choice. This study contributes to the understanding of pension plan design and decision-making dynamics between employers and workers, providing valuable insights for achieving a balance between retirement benefits and cost management.