Best Policy Administration Software Systems for MGAs

An MGA writing SME property on one carrier's paper wins a second capacity provider for cyber. The new carrier wants a monthly bordereau in its own template, a lower sum-insured limit, two extra referral triggers, and premium remitted 45 days after month end instead of 30.

None of that is unusual. Every item on the list is a change to the policy administration system.

If that system was built for a carrier writing on its own balance sheet, each item becomes a change request: a new report, a fork in the rating logic, a manual check before binding, an exception in finance. If it was built for delegated authority, it is a new binder configured next to the existing one, and the first bordereau comes out of the same policy records as everything else.

That difference is what this guide is about. It explains what MGA policy administration software has to do that a carrier system does not, and then compares ten platforms MGAs are choosing in 2026.

What is MGA policy administration software?

MGA policy administration software is the system a managing general agent uses to rate, quote, bind, issue and service policies under authority delegated by one or more insurers, and to report that business back to each of them. On top of a carrier's policy lifecycle it adds binder limits, referrals, bordereaux and commission accounting for every capacity provider.

The lifecycle part is the same as in any insurance policy administration software: products, rating, underwriting rules, endorsements, renewals, cancellations, documents and billing. The delegated-authority part is where MGA systems differ from each other, and where most buying mistakes are made.

Why MGAs need a different policy administration system from carriers

A carrier's policy admin system answers to one balance sheet. An MGA's answers to several, and each of them can audit it.

That is not a niche requirement any more. AM Best's market segment report, published in July 2026, put US MGA direct premium at $108.7 billion in 2025, up 17.8% on a restated $92.3 billion in 2024, across nearly 800 MGAs that met the NAIC reporting threshold. It was the fifth consecutive year of double-digit growth.

The same report carried a warning. "The maturing MGA market will need greater discipline in building portfolios," said Helen Andersen, industry research analyst at AM Best. Conning's fronting study, published in August 2026, shows why capacity providers are listening: initial gross accident-year loss ratios for fronted business have developed adversely in each of the last seven accident years.

Capacity that gets more selective asks for more evidence. In practice that means cleaner bordereaux, tighter authority controls and an audit trail showing who bound what under which rule. All three are properties of the policy administration system rather than of the underwriting team, which is why the system now comes up in capacity negotiations as well as IT budgets.

Several binders, one book

Most growing MGAs run more than one binder: different carriers, different lines, sometimes Lloyd's syndicates alongside a US fronting carrier. Each binder carries its own limits, territories, rates, wordings, commission terms and reporting schedule. The system has to hold all of them side by side without copying the product for each carrier, and it has to know which binder a risk falls under at the moment of quoting.

Authority as rules, not as a PDF

A binding authority agreement is a set of limits: maximum sum insured, permitted occupancies or classes, territories, prior-loss thresholds. In a system built for MGAs those limits run as underwriting rules at quote time. A risk inside them binds; a risk outside them is referred to the carrier with the failed rule attached. In a system not built for it, the limits live in an underwriter's head and the breach shows up later, in the carrier's audit.

Bordereaux from live data

Premium and claims bordereaux are the MGA's report card. Built from exports and spreadsheets they drift from the book, and every capacity provider wants its own format and cadence. Generated from the same policy and claims records the MGA services, they reconcile by construction, and adding a carrier means adding a template rather than a monthly reconciliation job.

Commission, fees and profit share

An MGA's revenue is commission, policy fees and, on good years, profit commission. The system should calculate those per binder from the policies that earned them, and track what has been collected and remitted to each carrier.

What to look for in MGA policy administration software

Every vendor below will say it supports MGAs. These questions separate the platforms built for delegated authority from carrier systems with an MGA page on their website.

• Can one product run under two binders with different limits, rates and commission, without duplicating it?
• Are authority limits enforced at quote time, and what does a referral to the carrier look like on screen?
• Show a premium bordereau and a claims bordereau for two carriers in two formats, generated from the live book.
• How long did the last three MGA customers take to add a new program, and who did the work: the MGA, the vendor or a systems integrator?
• What happens to cost when GWP doubles? Per-policy and percentage-of-premium pricing grows with the book; a flat platform fee does not.
• If the MGA is acquired, or a capacity provider moves the book, can the configuration and data be exported in a usable form?

The last two questions matter more for MGAs than for carriers. Conning's 2026 MGA study put statutory MGA premium growth at 12% in 2025, more than twice the roughly 5% of the wider P&C market, and fronted premium grew faster still.

A pricing model tied to premium volume turns that growth into a rising software bill. Consolidation is the other half: MGAs are bought and merged often, and a platform whose data cannot leave cleanly becomes a problem in due diligence.

Best policy administration software systems for MGAs in 2026

The ten platforms below either market a product for MGAs or run named MGA customers. Facts come from vendor websites, press releases and trade press, checked in October 2026. Where a vendor does not publish a delegated-authority feature, we say so rather than assume it: that is what to test in a demo.

1. Guidewire InsuranceNow

Guidewire (NYSE: GWRE, San Mateo, California) is best known for PolicyCenter, the core platform behind many tier-one carriers. For MGAs it puts forward InsuranceNow, which it acquired with ISCS in 2017 and now runs on its AWS-based cloud. Guidewire's MGA page lists bordereaux production, multi-carrier coverage sharing, delegated authority, referral logic and TPA coordination as supported in one place, and the 2026 Palisades release added embedded assistants across InsuranceNow and PolicyCenter. Gartner placed InsuranceNow as a Challenger in its September 2025 Magic Quadrant for SaaS P&C core platforms in North America.

Pros:

• Delegated authority, referrals and bordereaux named as native capabilities
• A large partner and data ecosystem, including HazardHub property data
• Financial scale and a long product roadmap behind it
• Named MGA references, including Velocity Risk and Delos

Strong suit: an established, packaged platform for MGAs that want to run on a standard model rather than design their own.

Watch out for: Guidewire itself positions InsuranceNow for MGAs that put speed and simplicity ahead of extensive customization. An MGA whose edge is an unusual product or process should test how far configuration goes before it needs Guidewire's services or a partner.

2. Openkoda

Openkoda is a highly customizable, AI ready policy administration system from a Wrocław-based team that has delivered insurance and finance systems for more than 20 years. For MGAs, the point is that binders are configuration rather than code: each one carries its own products, rates, authority rules, commission terms and bordereau template, and a new program goes live beside the ones already writing. Authority limits run as underwriting rules at quote time, and anything outside them is referred to the carrier with the failed rule attached.

Bordereaux are built from the same policy and claims records the MGA services, on each carrier's template and schedule. The AI Product Builder drafts products, pricing and rules from a plain-English description as a change your team reviews and approves before anything goes live.

Pros:

• Per-binder configuration of products, authority, commission and bordereaux
• Multi-tenancy on Enterprise, for several brands, programs or entities in one deployment
• Broker and client portals plus per-form submission APIs for distribution partners
• Configuration and data exportable at any time, on managed cloud or on-premise

Strong suit: MGAs whose programs, products or carrier terms do not fit a standard model, and who want to change them without a services project.

Watch out for: Openkoda has fewer years of accumulated functionality than Guidewire or the large suites, and a shorter list of MGA references. It suits teams that value control over the product and the data, and speed of change, more than the breadth of a long-established suite. See the MGA software page for the screens.

3. Insurity Pro Suite

Insurity (Hartford, Connecticut) is a P&C software group backed by GI Partners since 2019. In June 2026 it named Jatin Atre chief executive and committed $100 million over two years to modernising its core platforms with embedded AI. Its MGA product was relaunched in September 2025 as Insurity Pro Suite, previously Sure MGA, aimed at MGAs, MGUs, syndicates and brokers. Insurity has built its MGA position by acquisition, including Virtual MGA in 2020, a specialist in the MGA and Lloyd's binding-authority market.

Pros:

• A product line aimed specifically at intermediaries since 2020
• Designed for high-volume programs and multi-jurisdictional arrangements
• Part of a wider P&C portfolio covering policy, billing, rating and analytics
• A long-standing US specialty and program customer base

Strong suit: US program and specialty MGAs that want a vendor focused on their segment, with carrier-side products from the same supplier.

Watch out for: the Pro Suite launch material does not spell out binding-authority limits, bordereaux or multi-carrier handling, so ask to see each. Existing Sure MGA customers should ask what the rebrand means for their version and roadmap.

4. Novidea

Novidea is an insurance distribution and management platform built on Salesforce, used by brokers, MGAs and London market firms. It reports more than 350 customers in 23 countries. Its platform covers binder and delegated-authority management, bordereaux, claims, financial data and portfolio reporting alongside distribution and policy administration, and it added automated bordereau ingestion in March 2025.

Bishop Street Underwriters, an MGA and MGU group with more than 60 users across three legal entities, uses it to standardise workflows and consolidate data across acquired businesses.

Pros:

• Binder management and bordereaux as named, core capabilities
• Broker, MGA and London market workflows on one data model
• Salesforce underneath, which suits firms already invested in it
• Carrier-specific payment schedules, added in a 2026 release

Strong suit: hybrid broker-MGA groups and London market coverholders, especially those consolidating acquired businesses onto one system.

Watch out for: running on Salesforce brings Salesforce licensing and its platform constraints into the cost and architecture. Novidea's claim that underwriters save about three hours a day is company-reported.

5. INSTANDA

INSTANDA is a London-based no-code insurance platform, hosted on Microsoft Azure, that says it serves more than 50 MGAs. It raised $20 million led by CommerzVentures in October 2025, taking total funding past $85 million, and was named Service Provider of the Year at the 2025 MGAA awards. It quotes launch times of two weeks for a simple or MVP product and six to ten weeks for specialist ones.

Its MGA case studies are specific: Great Plains Casualty reached 19 states within four months of launch, and AiA reported a 209% increase in new business premium within a year.

Pros:

• No-code product creation that business teams run themselves
• Published launch-time targets and named MGA results
• Digital distribution for brokers and direct customers from the same product
• Well funded for expansion in North America and Europe

Strong suit: MGAs launching new products quickly, especially digital and specialty lines with online distribution.

Watch out for: INSTANDA's MGA page talks about product creation, administration and distribution but not about binding authority, bordereaux, multi-carrier capacity or commission. Test those against your own binders.

6. Acturis

Acturis, founded in 2000, is a SaaS platform for general insurance broking and underwriting with more than 50,000 users across the UK, Ireland, Canada, France and Poland. It is a common choice for UK brokers and MGAs, and its Canadian business is winning MGAs too: Soplex Solutions, a Quebec City MGA, moved about 50 users from Applied TAM to Acturis in February 2026.

Pros:

• A long track record in UK broking and MGA operations
• Broker, MGA and accounts functions on one platform
• A large user base, so many hires already know it
• Growing Canadian presence with recent MGA migrations

Strong suit: UK, Irish and Canadian MGAs, particularly hybrid broker-MGA businesses, that want a proven platform their staff may already use.

Watch out for: Acturis comes from broking. MGAs with complex rating or unusual products should test product configuration and rating depth as carefully as the broking and accounts functions.

7. SSP

SSP is a UK insurance software group with more than 700 insurance clients across six continents and more than 40 classes of business. In June 2026 SSP UK & Ireland joined the MGAA and launched Pure Product Studio, an AI configuration tool that generates product setups, including screens, business rules and lists, from a plain-English description. SSP says it turns launch cycles that normally take three to six months into days.

Pros:

• Long experience with UK insurers, brokers and MGAs
• Policy administration and underwriting from one supplier
• AI product configuration with lifecycle management and automated tests
• Coverage of many classes and jurisdictions

Strong suit: UK and international MGAs that want an established supplier with a new AI layer for product configuration.

Watch out for: Pure Product Studio is a 2026 launch, so the claim of launches in days rather than months has little public customer evidence yet. Ask for references that have used it on a live product.

8. Origami Risk

Origami Risk (Chicago, founded 2009) started in risk management information systems and now sells policy administration, billing, rating and claims to insurers, MGAs, TPAs and risk pools, on a multi-tenant cloud platform. It says it serves more than 1,000 organisations. In June 2026 Way Specialty, a managing general underwriter that works only with independent agents and brokers, deployed its policy administration and billing, with implementation partner Wikifri.

Pros:

• Policy, billing, rating and claims on one platform
• Built-in rating and ISO content
• Delegated-authority and open-market business on the same system
• A recent named MGU reference

Strong suit: US specialty MGAs and MGUs that also want claims and risk management from the same vendor.

Watch out for: public material says little about binding-authority controls or bordereaux, and implementations often involve a partner. Price the partner's work as part of the project.

9. Socotra

Socotra, founded in 2014 and venture-backed (Insight Partners led its $50 million Series C in 2022), sells a cloud-native, API-first core covering policy, billing, rating and reporting. Its lines range from personal and commercial to embedded, telematics and parametric, and its customers include AXA, Mutual of Omaha and MS Amlin. Socotra says it was named a Visionary in Gartner's 2026 Magic Quadrant for SaaS P&C core platforms in North America.

Pros:

• Modern, API-first architecture that suits product and engineering teams
• Wide range of lines, including embedded and parametric
• Integration marketplace with partners such as Verisk and Earnix
• Published performance and uptime figures

Strong suit: technology-led MGAs with their own engineers, building digital or embedded products that need a flexible core.

Watch out for: Socotra's website does not mention MGAs, delegated authority or bordereaux. It is a strong core, but binder limits, multi-carrier reporting and commission may be things you build on top of it.

10. BriteCore

BriteCore was founded in 2009 when six P&C insurers partnered with a software developer, and it says more than 100 insurers in North America use its cloud-native policy administration system. It has a dedicated MGA page, and in May 2026 it released eight embedded AI copilots, from submission intake to rate changes, behind an MCP service that logs agent access and keeps a human in the loop. Its most recent announced win, Discovery Insurance in April 2026, is a regional carrier.

Pros:

• Cloud-native policy, billing and claims for small and mid-sized P&C
• Configurable products and workflows
• Eight embedded AI copilots, released in May 2026
• Partner marketplace for third-party data

Strong suit: North American MGAs and small carriers in personal and small commercial lines that want an affordable cloud core.

Watch out for: the MGA page makes no specific claims about binding authority, bordereaux or multi-carrier capacity, and its named references are carriers. Ask for a live MGA reference.

MGA policy administration software compared

"Not stated" does not mean a vendor cannot do it. It means the vendor does not say so publicly, and you should ask to see it working on your own binders. For a wider view of MGA operations beyond the policy system, see our guide to MGA insurance software, and for UK market figures, the UK MGA insurance market report.

FAQ

What is the difference between MGA software and a carrier policy administration system?

Both run the policy lifecycle. MGA software adds what delegated authority needs: binder limits enforced at quote time, referrals to the carrier, a bordereau for each capacity provider, and commission and fee accounting per binder. A carrier system answers to one balance sheet and usually lacks those by default.

Do MGAs need a separate bordereaux tool?

Not if the policy administration system generates bordereaux from its own policy and claims records in each carrier's format. A separate tool makes sense when the PAS cannot, but it adds another export and reconciliation step every month.

How long does it take to implement MGA policy administration software?

Published figures vary widely. INSTANDA quotes two weeks for a simple product and six to ten weeks for a specialist one; full migrations of an existing book usually take months. Ask each vendor how long its last three MGA customers took, and who did the work.

How is MGA policy administration software priced?

Most vendors do not publish prices. Common models are per policy, a percentage of gross written premium, per user, or a flat platform fee. For a fast-growing MGA the model matters as much as the starting price, because premium-linked fees rise with the book.