We analyze the prevailing valuation practices in the life settlement industry based on a sample of 11 funds that cover a large portion of the current market. The most striking result is that a majority of asset managers seem to substantially overvalue their portfolios relative to the prices of comparable transactions that have recently been closed. Drawing on market‐consistent estimates with regard to medical underwriting, it is possible to trace back the observed discrepancies to inadequately low model inputs for life expectancies and discount rates. The main consequences are a dissimilar treatment of investor groups in open‐end funds structures as well as an unduly high compensation for managers and third parties. To address this predicament, we suggest defining life settlements as level 2 assets in the fair value hierarchy of IFRS 13, improving transparency and disclosure requirements, and developing new incentive‐compatible fee schedules.