And how producers can deliver them

As a producer, you have a lot on your plate,

and the last thing you want is for every renewal to turn into a forensic audit.

By Michael Wayne

Underwriters are not shy about what they want from a submission: better data. Unfortunately, as producers, deals seem to stall or die frequently because of a lack of said better data. Producers aren’t indifferent when it comes to collecting data. The disconnect is that what producers are submitting isn’t something that underwriters can confidently price, defend internally, or reinsure.

Yes, clean storytelling still matters when it comes to the commercial marketplace, but the reality is data credibility goes a long way to close deals. As a producer, you have a lot on your plate, and the last thing you want is for every renewal to turn into a forensic audit. Here are the top five data points underwriters trust most, why they matter, and how you can gather them realistically.

Normalized loss runs
Loss runs remain the foundation of underwriting, but raw data without context is increasingly viewed as incomplete, sometimes misleading, and can create a sense of unease for underwriters. Oftentimes, producers submit losses without adjusting for payroll growth, revenue spikes, acquisitions, or territory changes. To an underwriter, that creates artificial volatility. Volatility drives pricing, retentions, or declinations.

Underwriters trust four things in this regard:

• Five years of loss history, normalized for exposure changes
• Frequency and severity separated
• Open claims with realistic reserves and narrative explanations
• Large losses clearly identified as anomaly versus trend

Producers can deliver by following three steps:

• Add a simple exposure timeline alongside the loss runs (headcount, revenue, units).
• Flag one-off losses with a short explanation: what changed, what was fixed, and why it won’t repeat.
• For larger accounts, include a one-page loss summary with three metrics: average loss size, claim frequency, and largest loss as a percentage of total incurred.

Actuarial modeling isn’t required. Clarity is.

Documented risk controls
Every submission says the same thing: “Strong safety culture. Robust controls.” The old adage, “I’ll believe it when I see it,” is what underwriters swear by though. Supplying a narrative without evidence to back it up forces underwriters to assume worst-case execution.

The absence of proof is often interpreted as an absence of discipline and a desire to conceal. Underwriters trust:

• Time-stamped photos of controls in place
• Inspection reports, even internal ones
• Maintenance logs and vendor contracts
• Written policies that match actual operations

Producers can deliver by doing three things:

• Submit three photos per key control (sprinklers, fleet safety devices, machine guarding).
• Include the most recent inspection report. Even if issues were found, transparency builds credibility.
• Attach vendor agreements for safety training, equipment maintenance, or cybersecurity monitoring.

One strong attachment has the potential to offset multiple pages of generic narrative.

Exposure metrics that match the risk
Applications still drive submissions. Increasingly, however, underwriters are pricing off operational metrics, not checkboxes. The pitfall for producers here is submitting only what the application asks for, even when better data exists. While the application may require vehicle count, take the extra step of providing miles driven per vehicle. Instead of just payroll for a workers comp consideration, provide hours worked by class. Blanket total insurable value may be the requirement, but it’s better to offer values by construction and occupancy.  

Underwriters trust:

• Metrics that directly correlate to loss drivers
• Consistency across years
• Ratios, instead of just totals

Producers can deliver by doing the following:

• Ask clients one follow-up question per line: “What metric best reflects your exposure?”
• Present exposures in a simple table with year-over-year comparisons.
• Highlight improving trends (reduced miles, fewer overtime hours, lower turnover).

Underwriters price confidence. Metrics create confidence.

Third-party validation
Underwriters don’t expect producers to be engineers, IT auditors, or safety consultants. They do, however, trust independent verification. Keep in mind, the goal here is validation, not overload. Dumping too much third-party data without interpretation doesn’t inspire confidence. It reeks of desperation.

Underwriters gain trust from:

• Telematics summaries, not raw feeds
• Cyber posture scans or assessments
• Engineering or loss control reports
• OSHA logs or safety audit summaries

How producers can deliver trust:

• Include a one-page summary of any third-party report.
• Highlight two strengths and one improvement area.
• Show what action has already been taken or is scheduled.

A short validation summary can carry more weight than a full report when it provides clarity.

A clear renewal narrative underwriters can defend internally
Underwriters don’t just price risk. They defend risk to management and reinsurance partners. A submission that helps them do that travels farther internally. Things can fall apart when a producer leaves an underwriter to connect the dots for themselves, guess at the story being told, and then relaying a false narrative.

What underwriters trust:

• A concise renewal story
• Clear explanation of what changed, good or bad
• A rationale for pricing expectations

How producers can deliver what is necessary:

• Include a one-page “Renewal Snapshot.”
• Acknowledge negatives honestly and explain mitigation.
• Align requested terms with demonstrated data improvements.

This is professional courtesy, not salesmanship.

Increasingly, producers winning in today’s market are submitting better data, not more data, and they are packaging it in a way underwriters can trust, price, and defend. Doing so does not require massive new systems or months of prep. It requires asking smarter questions, collecting proof, and telling a clearer story.

When your submissions consistently answer the underwriter’s real concerns, you’ll notice fewer follow-up questions, faster quotes, and better terms for clients. Trust is the most valuable coverage enhancement you can deliver.

The author

Tim Wayne is a freelance writer who focuses on insurance and risk management.