The term “structured products” should be ditched in favour of protected invest-ments, says Barclays Wealth director Colin Dickie.
Speaking at a Money Marketing round table on structured products, Dickie said most businesses now work in the genre of protected investments.
He said structured products may have served their purpose in the early to mid-1990s but advisers and investors have now put up a barrier against these products as they are unsure what they actually deliver.
He said: “The challenge for us protected investment providers is that while the perception is not there, we are actually in the market as traditional fund offerings in that we are looking for the same pounds. The problem is we are put in a box as a completely separate investment entity and part of that has to do with the term ‘structured product’ and the unknown that surrounds it.”
Nucleus chief executive David Ferguson believes caution has to be advocated if products are to be placed under the protected banner.
He said: “We are talking growth products here so we need to be careful as we have had a history of income-generating products that have been anything but protected. If a five-year income-paying structured product comes to market and does not protect your initial capital if it goes wrong, then the last thing it should be dubbed is a protected investment.”
NDF director Paul Bispham said: “Protection is just one of many things a structured product offers. You can use them to gain exposure to all market conditions while they are also something that your clients can make money out of in flat or slowly growing markets.”