Industry owned, Industry wide
Industry owned, Industry wide
Industry owned, Industry wide
The Insurance Times eTrading Survey is the largest and most credible pulse-check on how UK brokers are engaging with digital trading.
At Polaris, where we operate imarket – the online trading platform connecting broker and insurer systems – the survey helps us understand broker behaviours, priorities – and frustrations.
This year’s findings tell a clear story: brokers are demanding smarter, broader, and more connected digital trading tools.
As someone who oversees imarket, I’m particularly interested in the trends around why brokers choose to trade digitally via their broking system or software house (SWH), or an insurer extranet.
In a frictionless world, brokers would naturally gravitate towards their SWH, keying in each risk once and access and compare multiple insurers, prices and covers instantly. That’s the dream for most brokers – but it’s not quite a reality just yet.
The fact is that broker systems vary – in their panel breadth and wider capabilities. The emergence of so many product deployments from Bravo Digital Trader over the last 12 months just goes to show that there’s still plenty of room for new propositions.
On the other hand, the recent move from Applied Systems’ to retire their Epic platform reminds us how dynamic – and sometimes uncertain – the system landscape can be.
Despite the flux in the market, one message is clear: brokers hold the power to influence insurer investment.
When brokers actively place business through their SWH, they signal demand. This not only encourages existing panel members to enhance their propositions but also attracts new insurers and MGAs keen to tap into a growing digital channel.
As a case in point, we saw Eaton Gate deploy their Tradespeople product via imarket earlier this year to the Bravo Digital Trader platform – which marked the first MGA deployment via imarket. We expect other MGAs to follow the same path.
The survey results show consistent broker priorities in terms of why they use their SWH. Top responses include ease of comparison, streamlined market search, and one-time data entry – all named by more than 50% of respondents.
But there are new signals worth watching. More brokers cited a wider range of cover options (up from 24% to 27% since 2024) and range of prices (36% to 40%) as key SWH features. These shifts align with the growing product range, volume and insurer interest we’re seeing on the ground.
In contrast, extranets – still widely used – offer a mixed bag. Yes, they’re seen as easy solutions, and brokers often perceive them to offer better pricing and dexterity. But let’s challenge that. Because in most cases, extranets and SWHs pull from the same rating engine. Price variations are often down to slightly different question sets rather than material underwriting differences.
The biggest hidden cost with extranets is time. Re-keying data across systems, deciphering different question wordings, and manually comparing different prices, products and service offerings takes time. Meanwhile, broker SWHs—benefiting from industry-wide standards set by Polaris – offer consistent and comparative journeys.
Turning now to referrals, which are often thought of negatively in digital trading. In reality, they’re vital for non-standard risks that still need underwriting judgement. The good news? The industry is getting faster and improving year on year:
| Response Time | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Within 15 mins | 11% | 11% | 15% |
| Within 2 hours | 37% | 41% | 50% |
| By half a day | 59% | 66% | 73% |
Complex referrals still take longer (60% completed in a day vs. 55% last year), but the trajectory is positive. Insurers are improving both their speed and consistency – and brokers are feeling the benefit.
A new survey question tackled this head-on – and the answers are instructive:
The takeaway? Brokers want both breadth and predictability. And insurers have a clear incentive – build your digital presence on broker systems, and brokers will respond.
Interestingly, three interconnected themes also emerged:
While this may seem contradictory, the nuance is important. What brokers really want is questions that really matter.
At Polaris, we review every standard change through the lens of customer reasonability – would a broker and their client reasonably be expected to know the answer? If not, we suggest either removal or rewording.
Insurers are also leaning more into data enrichment to refine pricing without burdening brokers with unnecessary extra questions. It’s a win-win-win for the broker, customer and insurer.
The story this year is a good one. Brokers are increasingly digital-first – and the best insurers are responding with smarter products, faster service, and more intuitive platforms.
The future belongs to those who enable brokers to work more efficiently. The more a broker can do in one place, the more efficient, profitable, and scalable their business becomes.
Let’s not underestimate the power of simplicity. It’s undoubtedly what will drive the next wave of digital growth.
