UnderwriteThe agencies we advise retain 23% more premium
than the industry average.
We sit across the table from agency principals and dissect their book — policy by policy, carrier by carrier — until the inefficiencies bleed out and the margins widen.
"Underwrite identified three carrier relationships costing us 6 points of margin we had written off as market conditions."
"A methodical, data-first approach to book analysis that most agency consultants don't have the actuarial background to execute."
"The before-and-after numbers on retention alone justify the engagement. The commission restructuring is where principals get religious."
Three principals. Their words. The numbers behind them.
We were bleeding renewals and I thought it was just the market. Turned out we had six carriers in personal lines where our loss ratios had quietly crossed a threshold nobody flagged. We were essentially subsidizing their bad bets with our book.
| Metric | Before Audit | After Audit | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy Retention Rate | 71.2% | 88.9% | +17.7pt |
| Avg. Loss Ratio (Personal Lines) | 68.4% | 61.1% | -7.3pt |
| Commission Rate (Avg.) | 9.8% | 12.4% | +2.6pt |
| Active Carrier Relationships | 14 | 9 | -5 carriers |
| Annual Technology Spend | $187K | $94K | -$93K |
| Annual Premium Retained | $13.1M | $16.3M | +$3.2M |
My loss ratios were telling a story I couldn't read. Every quarter the numbers looked different and I didn't know if it was underwriting, claims, or just bad luck. Underwrite came in and within three weeks had a line-by-line breakdown that made everything obvious in retrospect.
| Metric | Before Audit | After Audit | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Commercial Lines Retention | 64.8% | 81.3% | +16.5pt |
| Loss Ratio (Commercial Auto) | 79.2% | 66.7% | -12.5pt |
| Loss Ratio (GL) | 71.4% | 58.9% | -12.5pt |
| Carrier Concentration Risk | 3 carriers, 74% | 6 carriers, 52% | Diversified |
| Commission Clawbacks (Annual) | $218K | $31K | -$187K |
| Net Revenue Margin | 11.2% | 16.8% | +5.6pt |
As an MGA you're supposed to understand risk better than anyone. But when you're managing 200 program submissions a quarter, the systematic inefficiencies hide in the aggregate. We needed someone to go granular — carrier by carrier, class code by class code.
| Metric | Before Audit | After Audit | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Program Retention (Wholesale) | 58.3% | 76.1% | +17.8pt |
| Blended Loss Ratio | 74.1% | 63.4% | -10.7pt |
| Reinsurance Cost as % Premium | 18.4% | 14.2% | -4.2pt |
| Profitable Program Lines | 7 of 14 | 11 of 13 | +4 profitable |
| Carrier Capacity Utilized | 61% | 84% | +23pt |
| Annual EBITDA Impact | Baseline | +$2.1M | +$2.1M |
Four phases. No summaries.
We don't produce executive summaries. We produce annotated line items with specific actions attached to each one.
Book Ingestion
Every policy, every carrier, every class code imported into our analysis framework. Loss runs, commission statements, renewal histories — nothing stays summarized.
Carrier Dissection
We map carrier relationships against market benchmarks. Which relationships are costing you margin? Which carriers are under-utilizing your book's strength?
Loss Ratio Forensics
Line by line. Class code by class code. The story your loss ratios are telling — we translate it into actionable restructuring.
Commission Architecture
Contingent commissions, profit-sharing triggers, override structures — most agencies leave 2–4 points on the table through poorly structured agreements.
2026 Independent Agency Benchmarking Report
How does your retention rate, loss ratio, and commission structure compare to 312 peer agencies in your premium tier?
47 pages. No sales pitch. Just the numbers.
Download Instantly
One email. No sequences.
Get Your Agency Audit
Tell us about your book. We'll tell you exactly where the margin is hiding.