The Retiree and the Structured Note
A 68-year-old client, Ms. Ivanova, has BGN 400,000 in savings, of which BGN 250,000 is earmarked for income over the next 15 years. Her only other income is a state pension of BGN 700 per month, and she has no investment experience beyond bank deposits. A consultant proposes investing BGN 200,000 in a 6-year autocallable structured note linked to a European equity index, with a 30% downside barrier, a 7% annual coupon if the index is above its initial level on an observation date, and full principal loss if the index falls more than 30%. The note's issuer is a mid-sized bank rated BBB. The consultant emphasizes the 7% coupon and says the barrier 'has never been breached historically.'
1. Evaluate the suitability of this recommendation against the client's profile.
Read the worked answer
The recommendation is unsuitable on several grounds:
- Capital preservation need: Half the client's income-generating capital would be exposed to full principal loss below the 30% barrier. For a retiree drawing income, a 30%+ index decline could permanently impair the funding of her remaining years.
- Complexity and experience: The client has only deposit experience. An autocallable with a barrier, observation dates, and issuer credit risk is a complex product requiring demonstrated understanding. The consultant has not evidenced that.
- Issuer concentration: BGN 200,000 with a single BBB-rated issuer creates large, undiversified credit exposure. If the bank fails, the note may be worthless regardless of index performance.
- Misleading framing: 'Never been breached historically' is not a risk measure. A 30% barrier can be breached in a severe drawdown, and past index performance does not bound future losses.
- Liquidity: Structured notes typically have wide secondary spreads or no market. The client may need access to capital before year six.
A suitable alternative would prioritize capital protection and predictable income - for example, a laddered deposit or government bond portfolio - with any equity-linked allocation limited to a small, clearly understood fraction.
2. If the client insists on some equity exposure, how should the consultant restructure the recommendation and document it?
Read the worked answer
Restructure toward a core-satellite approach:
- Core (majority): Keep the income-generating capital in capital-protected instruments - Bulgarian government bonds or insured deposits laddered to match the 15-year income need. This secures the funding objective.
- Satellite (limited): Allocate no more than roughly 10–15% of investable assets (BGN 40,000–60,000) to diversified equity exposure via a low-cost, transparent fund rather than a single structured note. This caps worst-case loss at an amount that does not threaten her income.
- Avoid the autocallable unless the client can articulate the payoff, the barrier, and the issuer risk, and the allocation is small enough that total loss is tolerable.
Documentation: Record the client's objectives, the income requirement, her limited experience, and the reasoning for the reduced allocation. Note that the structured note was considered and declined, with the reasons. Obtain a signed suitability statement. If she still wants the note, record the specific risks explained (barrier, issuer credit, illiquidity) and her acknowledgment, and cap the size. The file must show that the recommendation serves her interest, not the consultant's incentive to place a high-margin product.