The yardstick for AI in insurance and InsurTech - calibrated for your sub-segment and your stack.

How we test, score, and publish

Yardstick Research is an independent software research and consulting agency for B2B AI tools. We test the tools ourselves, score them on outcomes that matter, and publish the results. Methodology in plain sight, so any board, risk committee, or state regulator can check our work. For carriers, reinsurers, agencies, brokers, MGAs, and TPAs, we weight Data Readiness and Tool Stack heavily because your existing policy-administration, agency-management, claims, and catastrophe-modeling systems determine what AI you can actually deploy, and HIPAA, NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500, NAIC data-security, SOC 2 Type II, and state algorithmic-bias rules gate every vendor procurement will sign. Here's how that actually happens:

1. 01

   We evaluate every insurance vendor on this list using public information and free-tier hands-on.

   Our researchers evaluate each vendor on the list using a defensible mix of inputs: vendor documentation and pricing pages, free-tier or trial-seat hands-on where the vendor offers one, video walkthroughs, third-party reviews (G2, Capterra, Gartner Peer Insights), published customer case studies, practitioner discussion (LinkedIn, Insurance Journal, InsurTech NY coverage), and recent funding and news coverage. Where we can sign up and exercise the product directly, we do, and grade the output against a sample workflow: in the insurance case, a submission triage on a sample broker submission, a first-notice-of-loss intake against a sample claim file, or an image-based estimate against a damage photo. We do not pay for paid tiers and we do not run a held-out catastrophe-model benchmark through every tool. Both are cost-prohibitive at the scale this guide covers.

   Every claim in a tear-sheet is labelled MEASURED (free-tier hands-on observation, or output graded against a sample workflow), ESTIMATED (cost-per-seat efficiency derived from the vendor's pricing page and feature limits), or CITED (vendor-published or third-party benchmark, with the source linked).

2. 02

   We score on outcomes buyers care about, with weights we publish.

   Vendor decks sell features. Insurance operators actually buy outcomes: combined ratios that drop, claims cycle times that shrink, retention and submission-to-bind that lift, and a stack that survives SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA, NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500, NAIC Insurance Data Security, Colorado / California / Connecticut algorithmic-bias rules, and Sarbanes-Oxley review. We score five dimensions: Strategy & Use Cases, Data Readiness, Tool Stack, Team & Workflow, and Budget & Procurement. Industry benchmarks for mature insurance operators sit at 65 / 70 / 55 / 65 / 75 percent of each dimension's maximum. The dimensions and benchmarks are public so your board can defend the pick, and so vendors can't quietly negotiate them. The audit also captures your operating baselines (combined ratio, claims-cycle median, renewal-retention rate, submission-to-bind conversion) plus your catastrophe-modeling stack (Verisk Touchstone, Moody RMS, Karen Clark KCC) and fans return-on-investment scenarios out per selected baseline.

3. 03

   We publish. Vendors check facts. Affiliate links are disclosed.

   Every vendor receives their scored tear-sheet seven days before publication and can flag factual errors (wrong pricing tier, misquoted feature, integration listed as native that's actually via a third party). Rankings can't be appealed; only factual corrections are accepted. Where the guide links to a vendor's product, that link may earn us a commission. Disclosed on every page where the link appears. Vendors do not pay for inclusion, placement, or ranking.