This text is a part of a sponsored collection by Professional Insured.
Cyber insurance coverage is high-stakes, form-heavy, and rising quick.
However most quoting engines wrestle to maintain up-too gradual, too inflexible, or not designed for Cyber’s nuanced questions and urge for food shifts.
That’s why MGAs and wholesalers are switching to RQB for multi-carrier cyber submissions which can be quick, versatile, and totally compliant.
Right here’s the way it works.
- What Makes Cyber Submissions Distinctive
| Problem | Why It’s Completely different |
| Extremely dynamic questions | New threats = fixed updates |
| Provider-specific urge for food | No two portals ask the identical questions |
| Subjectivity in responses | “MFA enabled?” “Safety workforce in place?” |
| Attachments required | App, loss runs, controls questionnaire |
| Tight turnaround calls for | Brokers need same-day quoting |
You may’t afford to fumble a cyber submission-or take days to finish one.
- RQB Was Constructed for This
RQB (Fee-Quote-Bind) handles Cyber workflows with:
- Dynamic consumption types – adapts based mostly on service urge for food
- Auto-attachment tagging – pulls in loss runs, cyber app, SOC report
- Quote-by-carrier visibility – real-time comparability + API push
- AI pre-fill – populates responses based mostly on prior submissions
- Bind set off – sends information on to service or inside UW
- The Cyber Submission Lifecycle with RQB
Step 1: Consumption
- E-mail or type is available in → AI extracts applicant identify, income, protection requested
- RQB identifies Cyber LOB and launches workflow
Step 2: Questionnaire Automation
- Dynamic questions load based mostly on service or program
- RQB pre-fills prior solutions, tags purple flags (e.g., “No MFA”)
- Dealer is looped in routinely for lacking information
Step 3: Provider Matching + Quote Push
- Primarily based on controls and eligibility, RQB routes to eligible markets
- API integration pushes quote requests (no handbook information entry)
- Underwriters return pricing → RQB logs, compares, routes to dealer
Step 4: Bind & AMS Replace
- Certain quote pushed to service (or despatched again to ops workforce)
- Coverage file created/up to date in AMS
- Activity created for issuance, COI, or renewal setup
- Actual Outcomes: Earlier than vs After RQB
| Metric | Guide Cyber Workflow | With RQB |
| Avg. quote prep time | 3-5 hours | 15-Half-hour |
| Provider-specific errors | Frequent (unsuitable fields) | Uncommon (<2%) |
| Time to gather paperwork | 2+ days | <1 day (AI chase + tagging) |
| Bind-to-AMS delay | 1-2 days | <1 hour |
- Bonus: Multi-State or Multi-Class Bundle?
RQB helps:
- Bundled Cyber + Tech E&O
- Standalone Cyber
- A number of restrict situations
- Management-based pricing tiers
- Submission routing to inside underwriters or third events
Cyber quoting is getting quicker. Are you?
Use RQB to triage, submit, and bind cyber risks-across a number of carriers-without rekeying or handbook uploads.
Begin with 5-10 cyber submissions and take a look at the distinction.
FAQ
Can RQB deal with supplemental apps and attachments?
Sure. RQB tags required paperwork, chases lacking information, and logs the entire bundle per service.
Does it work with our AMS or simply EI?
RQB integrates with Professional Insured, Epic, AMS360, or standalone.
What if we underwrite Cyber in-house?
You may construct customized types in RQB, and route quotes internally or to outdoors companions.
Study extra about our real-time quoting platform RQB
Matters
Cyber
Desirous about Cyber?
Get automated alerts for this matter.
