We Do Not Know Who Our Best Customers Are
in Insurance Brokers

The short answer

Best does not mean largest. It means the accounts that renew without replacing 142 others, generate contingent commissions on top of the 71 percent carrier flow, and stay inside the 1.8 to 2.3 point margin impact when fees are introduced. What makes this harder for insurance brokers is structural: 71 percent of revenue flows through carrier commissions while shifting an incremental 8 percent to fees would require replacing 142 renewal accounts and cut near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points. Any credible answer therefore has to hold 19.0 and 91.2 in the same view, which is exactly where most internal analysis stops because the two live in different systems.

Most insurance brokers can name their largest accounts by the 47.8 million dollars in total revenue from commissions and fees but very few can name their best, because best requires combining standard commissions, contingent commissions, and renewal retention that usually live in different systems.

The results are consistently surprising. The largest accounts by carrier commissions are frequently mid-ranked once cost to serve with risk-control or captive feasibility is included; the best segment is often one nobody targeted deliberately, discovered by accident and never systematised, showing up at 19.0, 91.2, 664, 31.

This matters because it decides everything downstream. Who to target for captive feasibility, what risk-control to build next, where to price fees, what to say about standard commissions. Getting it wrong means optimising the entire business for the wrong customer.

How to tell this is actually your problem

These three together are the signature. One on its own usually points somewhere else.

✓ Best customer means largest by carrier commissions in CFO review
✓ Cost to replace 142 renewal accounts is not known by segment
✓ The ideal customer profile was written from the 47.8 million dollars book rather than from the renewal retention base

The move that usually makes it worse. Defining the ideal customer from the largest accounts, which selects for the ones that force an 8 percent fee shift requiring 142 replacements and cutting near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points.

Who this is for — and who it is not

It is for you if you run or finance an insurance broker and best customer means largest by revenue in internal conversation. It is the situation where the numbers are available but nobody has put them in an order that produces a decision.

It is not for you if Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.

What this looks like when the analysis is actually run

Below is an excerpt from a real run of this analysis on an insurance broker. It is a sample profile rather than a customer, and it is unedited engine output — this is the format you get, on your own numbers.

The subject is Kesterline Risk Partners, a sample company profile used for testing rather than a customer — 47.8 million dollars in total revenue from commissions and fees.

This is one move out of a full analysis. Read a complete report — every page, no email required.

What the engine does with this question

This question routes to Customer Value Architecture, one of 29 engagements the platform runs. For insurance brokers it works through 19.0, 91.2, 664 and 31, then produces the sequence rather than a list of options — which move first, what it funds, and the observation that would say the sequence is wrong.

You watch the analysis get built before paying anything. Read a complete report here if you would rather see the depth first.

Questions people ask about this

How do I identify my most profitable customers?

Combine contribution, acquisition cost and retention at the segment level. Any one of the three alone produces a ranking that is confidently wrong.

What if my best customers are a small segment?

That is usually good news — it is a targeting instruction. The relevant question is whether the segment is large enough to support your growth plan, which is answerable.

Should I fire unprofitable customers?

Reprice first; some become profitable and the rest leave with the decision made for you. Firing directly is faster and costs you the information about which were repriceable.

Is this different in insurance brokers than in other industries?

Materially, yes. 71 percent of revenue flows through carrier commissions while shifting an incremental 8 percent to fees would require replacing 142 renewal accounts and cut near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points — which changes both the diagnosis and the order of the fixes. The metrics that decide it here are 19.0, 91.2, 664, and an answer built on industry-general benchmarks will usually point at the wrong one first.

What data do I need before this analysis is worth running for an insurance broker?

Less than most people expect. Your last twelve months of revenue and cost split the way you already split it, plus whatever you hold on 19.0 and 91.2. The analysis is explicit about what it is assuming where your data stops, which is more useful than waiting for numbers you may never have.

When is Percision the wrong tool?

Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Does Percision replace a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, or AI implementation team?

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.