What Due Diligence Should New Pet Insurance MGAs Conduct on a Carrier's Existing Pet Insurance Book
Reading Between the Lines of a Carrier's Loss Triangles: The Investigation That Prevents Costly Partnership Mistakes
A carrier with glossy marketing materials and an enthusiastic program underwriter can still be the wrong partner for your pet insurance MGA. The truth about whether a carrier can support a profitable program lives in their loss development data, their claims handling metrics, and their operational infrastructure, none of which appear in the pitch deck. Conducting rigorous carrier due diligence on a pet insurance MGA's potential partner requires digging into granular performance data that most eager founders skip over in their rush to secure paper.
Carrier due diligence is not a formality. It is the investigative process that separates informed partnership decisions from costly mistakes. Many new MGAs, eager to secure carrier paper and begin writing business, accept surface-level financial summaries without digging into the granular data that reveals the true health of a carrier's pet insurance operations. This post provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating every dimension of a carrier's existing pet insurance book before committing to a binding authority agreement.
Why Is Investigating a Carrier's Existing Pet Insurance Book Essential Before Signing a Partnership Agreement?
Investigating a carrier's existing book is essential because historical performance data reveals operational strengths, hidden risks, pricing adequacy, and claims management effectiveness that determine whether the carrier can support a profitable MGA program.
1. Historical Performance Predicts Future Support
A carrier with a profitable, well-managed pet insurance book has demonstrated that their actuarial pricing, claims handling, and operational infrastructure work. This track record provides the MGA with confidence that the carrier's systems, processes, and people can support a new program. Conversely, a carrier with a deteriorating pet insurance book may lack the expertise or commitment to support an MGA program successfully.
2. Existing Book Data Validates Pricing Assumptions
The carrier's existing loss experience provides the most relevant data for validating the MGA's own pricing assumptions. If the MGA plans to target similar demographics, geographies, or coverage structures, the carrier's historical claims data becomes the starting point for actuarial analysis. Without this data, the MGA is pricing in the dark.
3. Operational Infrastructure Is Already Tested
A carrier that has been writing pet insurance has already built and tested the claims processing, policy administration, billing, and regulatory compliance infrastructure needed for the line. The MGA benefits from this existing infrastructure rather than requiring the carrier to build capabilities from scratch. Understanding the carrier's underwriting appetite alongside their existing book performance gives the MGA a complete picture of partnership viability.
Make informed carrier partnership decisions backed by data.
Visit Insurnest to learn how we help MGAs launch and scale pet insurance programs.
What Financial Performance Data Should an MGA Request From the Carrier?
An MGA should request at least three years of ultimate loss ratios by accident year, premium volume trends, expense ratios, combined ratios, and loss development triangles broken down by coverage type, geography, breed category, and pet age segment.
1. Loss Ratio Analysis by Accident Year
The loss ratio is the single most important metric for evaluating a carrier's pet insurance book. Request ultimate loss ratios (not calendar year ratios) for at least three accident years to understand the trend. Improving loss ratios suggest better risk selection and pricing over time. Deteriorating loss ratios signal potential adverse selection, inadequate pricing, or claims management issues.
| Loss Ratio Metric | What It Reveals | Benchmark |
|---|---|---|
| Ultimate loss ratio (3-year average) | Overall book profitability | 60%-72% |
| Loss ratio trend direction | Improving or deteriorating performance | Flat or improving |
| Loss ratio by coverage type | Which products are profitable | Accident-only below 55% |
| Loss ratio by geography | Regional pricing adequacy | Consistent across states |
| Loss ratio by pet age | Age-based pricing accuracy | Increasing with pet age |
2. Premium Volume and Growth Trends
Review the carrier's pet insurance premium volume over the past three to five years. Growing premium volume indicates market confidence and distribution effectiveness. Declining volume may signal competitive pressure, pricing issues, or the carrier's reduced commitment to the line. Flat growth in a market growing at double-digit rates suggests the carrier is losing market share.
3. Loss Development Triangles
Loss development triangles show how claims costs evolve from initial reporting through ultimate settlement. Pet insurance typically has short-tail loss development, with most claims reaching ultimate within 12 months. If the carrier's triangles show extended development periods, it may indicate complex claims handling processes, slow adjudication, or reserves that are being strengthened significantly after initial setting.
4. Expense Ratio and Combined Ratio
The expense ratio reveals how efficiently the carrier operates its pet insurance program. A high expense ratio suggests operational inefficiency that may translate into higher costs for the MGA program or pressure on commission rates. The combined ratio (loss ratio plus expense ratio) tells the MGA whether the carrier's pet insurance book is generating underwriting profit.
How Should an MGA Evaluate the Carrier's Claims Handling Performance?
An MGA should evaluate claims handling by reviewing average settlement timelines, denial rates, complaint ratios, reopened claims percentages, and policyholder satisfaction scores, all of which directly impact the MGA's brand and retention rates.
1. Average Claims Settlement Timelines
Request data on average days from claim submission to payment for different claim types. Faster settlement times correlate with higher policyholder satisfaction and retention. If the carrier's settlement timelines exceed industry benchmarks, the MGA's policyholders will experience delays that damage the brand. Understanding carrier claims payment speed is critical because it directly affects policyholder experience and renewal rates.
| Claims Metric | Best-in-Class | Industry Average | Below Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average days to payment (accident) | 2-4 days | 7-10 days | 15+ days |
| Average days to payment (illness) | 4-7 days | 10-14 days | 20+ days |
| Claims denial rate | Below 10% | 10-15% | Above 15% |
| Reopened claims rate | Below 3% | 3-5% | Above 5% |
| Touchpoints per claim | 1-2 | 3-4 | 5+ |
2. Claims Denial Rates and Reasons
High denial rates indicate either poor product design that creates coverage gaps, inadequate policyholder communication about coverage terms, or overly aggressive claims handling. Review not just the overall denial rate but the breakdown of denial reasons. A high proportion of denials for pre-existing conditions may indicate inadequate enrollment screening. Frequent denials for excluded conditions may suggest the product excludes too many common veterinary treatments.
3. State Insurance Department Complaint Data
NAIC complaint data is publicly available and provides an independent view of the carrier's claims handling performance. Review the carrier's pet insurance-specific complaint ratio (complaints per thousand policies) and compare it to industry averages. High complaint ratios signal systemic issues that will affect any MGA program on that carrier's paper.
4. Policyholder Satisfaction and Net Promoter Scores
If the carrier tracks policyholder satisfaction metrics or Net Promoter Scores for their pet insurance book, request this data. Customer satisfaction is the leading indicator of retention, and retention is the primary driver of long-term MGA profitability. A carrier whose policyholders are dissatisfied with claims handling will make it difficult for the MGA to build a sustainable, growing book.
What Policyholder Demographics and Book Composition Data Should the MGA Review?
The MGA should review breed mix, age distribution, geographic concentration, coverage tier distribution, average premium, and distribution channel mix to understand whether the carrier's experience is relevant to the MGA's target market.
1. Breed and Species Mix
The breed composition of the carrier's book determines how relevant their loss experience is to the MGA's planned product. If the carrier's book is heavily concentrated in one or two breeds, their loss ratios may not be representative of a more diversified book. Review the top 20 breeds by policy count and their respective loss ratios.
2. Pet Age Distribution
Analyze the age distribution of pets in the carrier's book. A book skewed toward younger pets will have lower loss ratios than one with a higher proportion of senior pets. Understanding the age profile helps the MGA calibrate expectations for their own book composition and validate pricing models that must account for pet age and species factors in rating models.
3. Geographic Concentration
Review the geographic distribution of the carrier's pet insurance policies. A book concentrated in high-cost veterinary markets like New York, California, or Massachusetts will have different loss experience than one spread across lower-cost regions. If the MGA plans to launch in different geographies than the carrier's existing concentration, the loss data may need adjustment.
| Demographic Factor | What to Review | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Top breeds by volume | Policy count and loss ratio per breed | Validates breed-level pricing |
| Age distribution | Policies by age cohort (0-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9+) | Calibrates age-based reserves |
| Geographic spread | Policies by state or region | Assesses regional pricing accuracy |
| Coverage tier mix | Accident-only vs. accident/illness vs. comprehensive | Reveals product preference data |
| Average premium | By breed, age, geography, and tier | Benchmarks competitive pricing |
| Distribution channel | Direct, agent, embedded, employer | Indicates channel performance |
4. Coverage Tier Distribution
The split between accident-only, accident and illness, and comprehensive coverage tiers reveals consumer preferences and pricing dynamics. A book heavily weighted toward accident-only coverage may indicate that the carrier's illness coverage pricing is not competitive, or that their distribution channels attract price-sensitive buyers.
Evaluate carrier partnerships with comprehensive due diligence support.
Visit Insurnest to learn how we help MGAs launch and scale pet insurance programs.
What Retention and Renewal Metrics Should an MGA Investigate?
An MGA should investigate 12-month and 24-month retention rates, lapse rate patterns, renewal pricing trends, and policyholder lifetime value metrics to assess the health and sustainability of the carrier's existing book.
1. Retention Rate Trends Over Time
Request retention rates for each of the past three to five years. Stable or improving retention indicates a healthy book with satisfied policyholders. Declining retention signals potential issues with claims handling, pricing adequacy, product design, or competitive pressure. For context, well-managed pet insurance books achieve renewal rates approaching 90%, which is among the highest in personal lines.
2. Lapse Rate Analysis by Policy Age
Analyze lapse rates by policy age to understand when policyholders are most likely to leave. First-year lapse rates are typically higher as policyholders test the product. Lapse rates that remain high in years two and three indicate fundamental product or experience issues. A book with strong first-year retention that improves in subsequent years is a positive signal.
3. Renewal Pricing Impact on Retention
Investigate whether the carrier has implemented significant rate increases on the existing book and how those increases affected retention. If the carrier has been raising renewal premiums aggressively, the book may be shedding healthy, price-sensitive policyholders while retaining those with anticipated claims, creating adverse selection. This is a critical adverse selection management consideration for any MGA evaluating the book's composition.
4. Policyholder Lifetime Value Analysis
If available, review the carrier's data on average policyholder lifetime (in months), cumulative premiums per policyholder, and cumulative claims per policyholder. This lifetime value analysis reveals whether the carrier's book generates long-term profitability or whether early-term losses from acquisition costs are never fully recovered.
What Red Flags Should a Pet Insurance MGA Watch for During Carrier Due Diligence?
Red flags include rising loss ratios over consecutive years, declining premium volume in a growing market, high regulatory complaint ratios, reluctance to share detailed performance data, rating agency downgrades, and frequent changes in pet insurance program management.
1. Deteriorating Loss Ratios
Loss ratios that have increased for two or more consecutive years indicate either inadequate pricing, worsening adverse selection, or declining claims management effectiveness. This is the most significant red flag because it suggests the carrier may not have the actuarial or operational capability to manage pet insurance profitably.
2. Reluctance to Share Data
A carrier that is reluctant to share detailed performance data during due diligence is either hiding poor performance or does not have the data infrastructure to produce granular reports. Both scenarios are problematic. The MGA needs transparent data sharing to make an informed partnership decision, and the carrier's reporting capabilities will directly affect the reporting and audit requirements of the partnership.
3. High Regulatory Complaint Ratios
Complaint ratios significantly above industry averages indicate systemic issues with claims handling, policyholder communication, or product design. These complaints not only damage the carrier's reputation but also create regulatory risk for any MGA operating on their paper.
| Red Flag | Severity | MGA Response |
|---|---|---|
| Rising loss ratios (2+ years) | High | Request detailed explanation and corrective actions |
| Declining premium volume | Moderate | Investigate causes: pricing, competition, or commitment |
| High complaint ratios | High | Review specific complaints for patterns |
| Reluctance to share data | High | Consider alternative carriers |
| Rating agency downgrade | Very High | Reassess partnership viability |
| Frequent management changes | Moderate | Assess institutional commitment to pet line |
| No dedicated pet insurance team | Moderate | Evaluate carrier's operational capability |
4. Rating Agency Warnings
Monitor the carrier's AM Best rating and any rating watch or outlook changes. A carrier on negative outlook or recently downgraded may face financial pressures that could affect their ability to support MGA programs. The carrier's financial strength rating is the first filter in any partnership evaluation.
5. Frequent Program Management Changes
If the carrier has cycled through multiple program managers, underwriting leaders, or claims directors for their pet insurance operations in recent years, it signals organizational instability. Frequent leadership changes disrupt relationships, create inconsistent decision-making, and may indicate internal disagreements about the carrier's commitment to pet insurance.
How Should MGAs Use Carrier Due Diligence Findings to Negotiate Better Partnership Terms?
MGAs should use due diligence findings to negotiate more favorable commission structures, claims handling SLAs, reporting requirements, and appetite expansion provisions that are grounded in the carrier's actual performance data.
1. Leverage Performance Data in Commission Negotiations
If the carrier's existing book shows strong profitability, the MGA can use this data to negotiate higher commission rates by demonstrating that the carrier's pet insurance operations generate healthy margins that can support competitive MGA compensation. Conversely, if the book shows marginal profitability, the MGA should negotiate for performance-based commission escalators tied to achieving better loss ratios through improved risk selection.
2. Set Claims SLAs Based on Existing Performance
Use the carrier's actual claims settlement data to establish service level agreements. If the carrier's existing book shows average settlement times of 10 days, negotiate SLAs that require improvement to 7 days within the first year. Benchmarking SLAs against actual performance ensures they are achievable while still driving improvement.
3. Negotiate Data Access and Reporting Standards
Due diligence may reveal that the carrier's reporting capabilities are limited. Use this finding to negotiate for enhanced reporting requirements in the partnership agreement, including real-time data access, monthly performance dashboards, and quarterly business reviews. The initial carrier meeting and pitch presentation is the right time to begin establishing expectations around data transparency.
4. Build Performance-Based Contract Terms
Structure the binding authority agreement with performance-based terms informed by due diligence. For example, if due diligence reveals that the carrier's claims handling could be improved, negotiate for the MGA to have input into claims procedures or the option to bring claims handling in-house after a defined performance review period. Understanding the registered agent and statutory requirements alongside operational terms ensures the partnership agreement covers both regulatory and performance dimensions.
Turn due diligence insights into stronger carrier partnerships.
Visit Insurnest to learn how we help MGAs launch and scale pet insurance programs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is due diligence on a carrier's existing pet insurance book important? Due diligence reveals whether the carrier's pet insurance experience has been profitable, what loss patterns exist, how the book is performing relative to industry benchmarks, and whether the carrier's operational infrastructure can support a new MGA program effectively.
What loss ratio data should an MGA request from a carrier? Request at least three years of ultimate loss ratios by accident year, broken down by coverage type, geographic region, breed category, and pet age segment. Also request loss development triangles to understand how claims develop over time.
How do I evaluate a carrier's claims handling performance from their existing book? Review average days to claim settlement, claims denial rates, reopened claims percentages, average number of claim touchpoints, and policyholder complaint data filed with state insurance departments. Compare these metrics against industry benchmarks.
What policyholder demographic data should an MGA review? Review the breed mix, age distribution, geographic concentration, coverage tier distribution, and average premium per policy of the existing book. This data reveals whether the carrier's experience is relevant to the MGA's target market.
Should an MGA be concerned if the carrier has no existing pet insurance book? Not necessarily. A carrier without pet insurance experience may be more flexible on product design and terms. However, the MGA must be prepared to provide more education, market data, and actuarial support to help the carrier become comfortable with the risk profile.
What retention and renewal data matters during due diligence? Review 12-month and 24-month retention rates, renewal rate trends over time, lapse rates by policy age, and reasons for non-renewal. Strong retention indicates policyholder satisfaction and product-market fit, while declining retention signals potential issues.
How do I assess whether the carrier's pricing is competitive? Compare the carrier's average premiums by breed, age, and coverage tier against published market data and competitor quotes. If the carrier's existing rates are significantly higher than market, the MGA's products may struggle to compete on price.
What red flags should MGAs look for during carrier due diligence? Red flags include rising loss ratios over consecutive years, declining premium volume, high policyholder complaint ratios, frequent product filing rejections, carrier downgrades from rating agencies, and reluctance to share detailed performance data.
