Why would parents, of a young adult without dependents, not profit from the young adult's Term Life Insurance?
It is not likely the YA would die in 10 years. Hence the investment the parents make in policy premiums would lose all of its money. Repeat: lose all money.  On average, you'll slightly lose with insurance. It's there for peace of mind and to mitigate a catastrophe. It's not an investment. Of course, if the YA is likely to die suddenly, that might change things. But concealing medical information would be grounds for denying the policy claim.
sell drugs? (joking)  In all seriousness though, your options to legally invest this money are limited, which leaves you to extra-legal options..... which many young people engage, different kind of candy I guess.   Ok so you cannot invest into stocks, to day trade. Because you're not an adult.  You can put the money in a bank, but the interest rate on that amount of money is in the realm of ~0.1%.  You can use the money to seed another legal business venture, say another kind of better candy.    My advice is to get a parental unit to put the cash into a mutual fund, in your name... then hand that over to you when you turn 18. You're extremely fortunate to have $50k in CDs, no debt, and $3800 disposable after food and rent. Congrats. Here's how I would approach it. If you see yourself getting into a home in the next couple of years, stay safe and liquid. CDs (depending on the duration) fit that description. Because you have disposable income and you're young, you should be contributing to a Roth IRA. This will build in value and compound over your lifetime, so that when you're in your 70s you'll actually have a retirement.  Financial planners love life insurance because that's how they make all their money. I have whole life insurance because its cash value will be part of my retirement. It may also cover my wife if I ever decide to get married. It may or may not make sense for you now depending on how soon you want to buy a home and home expensive they are in your zip code.  Higher risk, higher reward- you can count on that. Keep the funds in the United States and don't try to get into any slick financial moves.  If you have a school in town, see if you can take an Intro to Financial Planning class. It's extremely helpful for anyone with these kinds of questions. "Your goals are excellent. I really admire your thoughts and plans, and I hold you in high esteem. Good credit is indeed an important thing to have, and starting young is THE smart idea with respect to this. I see that you have as a goal the purchase of a home. Indeed, another fine ambition. (Wow, you are a different breed from what I normally encounter on the internet; that's for sure !) Since this won't happen overnight, I would encourage you to think about another option. At this point in your life you have what few people have: options, and you have lots of them. The option I would like to suggest you consider is the debt free life. This does NOT mean life without a credit card, nor does it mean living with ones parents all their days. In its simplest form, it means that you don't owe anybody anything today. An adapted form of that; with the reality of leases and so on, is that you have more immediate cash in the bank than you have contractual responsibilities to pay others. e.g., if the rent on a place is X, and the lease is 12 months, then you don't sign until you have 12X in the bank.  That's the idea. If there is anything good that these past 10 years of recession and financial disasters have provided us as a nation, it is a clear picture presented to our young people that a house is not a guaranteed way to riches. Indeed, I just learned this week of another couple, forced out by foreclosure again. Yes, in the 1970s and 1980s the formula which anyone could follow was to take a mortgage on a single family house; just about any house in any community; and ten years later double your money, while (during those ten years) paying about the same (and in a few years, actually less) amount of money as you would for an apartment with about half the space. Those days were then, not now, and I seriously doubt that I will ever see them again in my lifetime. You might, at your age, one day. In the mean time, I would like to suggest that you think about that word options again; something that you have that I don't. If your mind is made up for certain that a house is the one and only thing you want, okay; this does not apply. During this time of building your credit (we're talking more than a year) I would like to encourage you to look at some of the other options that are out there waiting for you; such as... I also encourage you to take a calculator and a spreadsheet (I would be surprised if there is no freeware out there to do this with a few clicks) and compare the past 30 years of various investments. For example... It is especially educational if you can see line charts, with the ups and downs along the way. One last thing; about the stock market, you have an option (I love that word when people your age are actually thinking) called ""dollar cost averaging"". If you are not aware of this concept, just ask and I will edit this post (although I'm confident it has been explained by others far better than myself on this very site). Hit just about any solid stock market investment (plain old mutual fund, even with a load, and it will still work) and I believe you'll see what I'm trying to get across. Still, yes, you need a roof, and a young person should clearly plan on leaving parents in a healthy and happy way; so again, if the house is the one and only goal, then go for it kid (uhm, ""kid"", if you're still under 18). All the best. Do remember that you will be fixing the pipes, not the maintenance guy." While this is a totally personal decision, I still think it would be a good idea to have some life insurance simply because you have someone that is currently dependent on your income.  Yes you have about 22 years in retirement, but if you consider taxes and market risk, there's still some uncertainty there.   Also, while your wife may be willing and able to work now, will she want to do that for years just to earn living expenses?   I would look at the costs on 10-year term life insurance and see if it's worth the extra peace of mind to you and your wife.  If your wife is fine with using your retirement as life insurance, then you can probably be OK without it. So to answer the question, it may be acceptable, but it's generally a very cheap way to get a lot of peace. I would not worry too much about the opinions of your parents - unless they are going to pay for the insurance, it's your decision. Something to consider is how broad is Yahoo! Finance taking in their data for making some comparisons.  For example, did you look at the other companies in the same industry?  On the Industry page, the Top Life Insurance Companies by Market Cap are mostly British companies which could make things a bit different than you'd think. Another point is how this is just for one quarter which may be an anomaly as the data could get a bit awkward if some companies are just coming back to being profitable and could have what appears to be great growth but this is because their earnings grow from $.01/share to $1/share which is a growth of $10,000 percent as this is an increase of 100 times but really this may just be from various accounting charges the company had that hit its reserves and caused its earnings to dip temporarily. A 529 plan is set up in a specific beneficiary's name but the money can be rolled over or transferred into another 529 plan in the same beneficiary's name, or the beneficiary can be changed by the owner of the account.  I mistakenly believed that the new beneficiary could be anyone else, but as mhoran_psprep has  pointed out in the comment below, the new beneficiary must be related to  the previous one in specific ways as detailed in Publication 970 2011, Tax Benefits for Education in order for the change to occur without any tax consequences.  So my original statement that distributions can be used for anyone's educational expense without tax consequences was incorrect; if the new beneficiary is not related to the original beneficiary, tax consequences will indeed occur.  Note also that unlike IRAs where the entire amount can be withdrawn by the owner without incurring a 10% penalty after a certain period or after reaching a certain age, distributions from a 529 plan for nonqualified expenses (including as a special case a withdrawal of funds by the owner) will incur the 10% penalty tax regardless of when this occurs. The problem with UGMA accounts is that you have to turn the money over to the beneficiary when that beneficiary becomes an adult (18 years old in most cases) regardless of your current opinion of that beneficiary, and the beneficiary is free to use the money to buy a motorcycle with it if she chooses instead of using it for her education.  In this sense, I agree with mhoran_psprep's answer that it is best to put away the money in an ordinary account without seeking tax benefits, and deal with the matter as you see fit when the niece is filling out her college paperwork. Not to pick your words apart, but I'm used to the word laddering as used with CDs or bonds, where one buys a new say, 7 year duration each year with old money coming due and, in effect, is always earning the longer term rate, while still having new funds available each year.  So. The article you link suggests that there's money to be saved by not taking a long term policy on all the insurance you buy. They split $250K 30 year / $1M 20 year. The money saved by going short on the bigger policy is (they say) $11K.  It's an interesting idea. Will you use the $11K saved to buy a new $1M 10 year policy in 20 years, or will you not need the insurance? There are situations where insurance needs drop, e.g. 20 years into my marriage, college fully funded as are retirement accounts. I am semi-retired and if I passed, there's enough money. There are also situations where the need runs longer. The concept in the article works for the former type of circumstance. Yes, you can be on a different plan from your dependents.   The only real benefit to having everyone on the sale plan is the Family Deductible and Family Out of Pocket Maximum; which are both generally two times the Individual amounts for the same plan.  When you have just two people on the plan, this combination doesn't do anything.  When you have three or more people on the same plan you can realize the benefit of combining everyone under one plan.  Once one person in the family meets their deductible, any combination of the other family members can meet the rest up to the Family deductible; same goes for the out of pocket max.