Cyber

CONS

• • No direct-to-consumer or small-business online quoting — cyber coverage is accessed exclusively through wholesale/retail brokers, making it inaccessible to individuals or SMBs shopping on comparison sites
• • Everest disclosed elevated casualty reserve strengthening in its 2024 results (roughly $1.7B Q4 2024 reserve charge across casualty lines per its earnings release), which prompted leadership changes and a strategic review that could affect appetite in specialty lines

CONS

• • Underwriting is widely regarded as among the strictest in the market — applicants without MFA, EDR, segregated backups and tested IR plans are routinely declined or sub-limited, particularly for ransomware
• • Personal Cyber Protection is generally only available as an endorsement to a Chubb Masterpiece homeowners policy, so renters and customers of other home insurers typically cannot buy it standalone

CONS

• • AIG publicly tightened cyber underwriting starting in 2021, requiring detailed ransomware controls (MFA, EDR, segregated backups) and cutting sublimits for ransomware/extortion — applicants without strong controls are frequently declined
• • Primarily a commercial/middle-market and large-account carrier; AIG does not market cyber insurance to individual consumers or very small businesses through direct channels — coverage is broker-distributed

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Cyber coverage is sold almost exclusively through independent agents and brokers — no direct online quote-and-bind for cyber policies, unlike newer insurtech competitors (Coalition, At-Bay, Cowbell)
• • Underwriting tightened significantly after 2020 ransomware losses; Travelers v. ICS (2022) became a high-profile case where Travelers sought to rescind a policy over alleged MFA misrepresentations on the application — application accuracy is scrutinized heavily

CONS

• • Not a direct-to-consumer carrier — personal cyber coverage is generally only available as an endorsement bundled into Zurich high-net-worth homeowners products, not as a standalone consumer policy
• • Cyber product is distributed exclusively through brokers/agents; no online quoting portal for small businesses or individuals

CONS

• • No direct-to-consumer or online quoting for cyber — coverage is only accessible via an independent/wholesale agent, which slows shopping and comparison
• • Cyber is a smaller line within RLI's portfolio (its book is dominated by surety, E&S property/casualty, and transportation), so it is not a market leader by cyber premium volume

CONS

• • Not designed for personal/consumer cyber insurance — QBE writes commercial cyber, so individual consumers comparing personal cyber policies generally cannot buy direct from QBE
• • Distributed exclusively through wholesale and retail brokers, with no direct-to-buyer online quoting, which adds friction for small businesses used to digital-first cyber MGAs (Coalition, At-Bay, Cowbell)

CONS

• • CNA itself was hit by a major Phoenix CryptoLocker ransomware attack in March 2021 (reportedly paying ~$40M, per Bloomberg reporting) — an incident frequently cited by brokers when comparing cyber carriers
• • Cyber coverage is sold exclusively through independent agents and brokers; there is no direct online quoting portal for consumers or small businesses

CONS

• • Cyber product is sold almost exclusively through retail and wholesale brokers — no direct-to-consumer or online quoting path for individuals or sole proprietors
• • Geared toward commercial buyers; Tokio Marine does not offer a personal cyber/identity-theft policy comparable to Chubb's or AIG's high-net-worth personal cyber endorsements

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies

CONS

• • Expensive
• • Complex policies