This text is a part of a sponsored collection by Knowledgeable Insured.
Should you’re uninterested in bouncing between quoting portals, manually importing insurance coverage utility varieties, and chasing underwriters for each submission-you’re not alone.
MGAs, carriers, and businesses are changing fragmented score instruments like Surefyre, ClarionDoor, and provider portals with RQB (Charge-Quote-Bind)a quoting platform constructed for velocity, API entry, and post-bind automation.
Let’s break it down.
- Overview: What Every Platform Actually Does
| Platform | Designed For | Limitation |
| Surefyre | Submission consumption + workflows | Guide quoting, restricted carriers |
| ClarionDoor | Provider-led quote configuration | Not MGA-centric, lacks bind workflows |
| Provider Portals | Direct market submission | No multi-carrier logic, 1:1 entry |
| RQB | MGA/provider quoting + bind | Constructed for velocity + handoff to BPO |
RQB is the one one designed for MGAs managing a number of markets, carriers, and workflows-and pushing submissions instantly into ops.
- Key Comparability: Quoting & Workflow Integration
| Function | RQB | Surefyre | ClarionDoor | Provider Portals |
| Multi-carrier quote engine | Sure | No | Partial | One after the other |
| API-enabled quoting & bind | Sure | – | Restricted | – |
| E mail/doc consumption | Constructed-in AI OCR | Guide | – | – |
| Submit-bind execution assist | By way of BPO or AMS | – | – | – |
| Rater + submission in a single | Sure | – | – | – |
| Underwriter triggers / guidelines | Sure | Partial | – | – |
- Actual-World Use Case: Multi-Provider BOP Quote
Situation: An MGA receives a BOP submission with 3 requested provider markets.
With Surefyre or ClarionDoor:
- Knowledge entered manually into 3 portals
- No quote logic or binding from identical interface
- No job created post-bind
- Guide quote monitoring spreadsheet
With RQB:
- E mail learn through AI → submission tagged as BOP
- Required docs categorised through OCR
- RQB identifies 3 eligible carriers based mostly on urge for food + LOB
- Quotes pulled through API or submitted from identical display screen
- Certain quote → AMS up to date → COI triggered
- Why MGAs Are Shifting to RQB
- Much less double-entry: One submission, a number of markets
- Sooner quoting: 5–10x extra quotes per CSR per day
- Fewer errors: Quotes pushed on to carriers
- Full integration: Binds push to AMS360, Epic, EI
- Ops-ready: Submit-bind duties (like endorsements, COIs, audits) circulate mechanically
- RQB vs “Only a Portal”
| Space | RQB | Conventional Portal |
| Quoting | Actual-time, multi-market | One provider at a time |
| Submission consumption | AI OCR & e mail routing | Guide add |
| Process project | Auto-create post-bind | Requires handbook monitoring |
| BPO execution obtainable | Sure | No |
| Pace to cite | 15–30 min | 2–6 hours (or days) |
Nonetheless utilizing Surefyre, ClarionDoor, or portals? RQB is constructed for quoting at scale.
Quote a number of carriers, bind, and automate downstream ops-all in a single stack.
Begin your quoting pilot with Selectsys.
FAQ
Do I would like to interchange my AMS to make use of RQB?
No. RQB works with AMS360, Epic, EI, or any AMS. It handles quoting and push-to-bind, then updates your system.
Can I configure carrier-specific guidelines in RQB?
Sure. Urge for food logic, underwriting flags, and LOB guidelines may be tailor-made per provider.
What traces of enterprise are supported?
WC, GL, BOP, Property, Auto, Cyber, Inland Marine, and extra.
Matters
Carriers
Excited by Carriers?
Get automated alerts for this matter.
