The Excel rater that
should have been a system.
The rating workbook prices real premium. It has no change history, no check against the filed rate, and it lives on one person’s laptop, in a version the broker may or may not have. When the examiner asks for every rate change since the filing and who approved each one, the answer is a reconstruction. Haltere ports the workbook into an auditable rating system, tested against your own quote history, where every rate change carries the filed rate it was checked against, the reviewer, and the frozen version that went live.
Not because it’s wrong.
Because it can’t prove it’s right.
A rating workbook answers “what is the premium?” It cannot answer “who changed the loss-cost multiplier in March, was it inside the filed band, and who approved it?” Those are the questions on a market-conduct exam and in a Model Audit Rule IT-controls review. Every Excel-to-software vendor pitches speed. None of them connect the rater to the filing.
Three things the workbook can’t.
Conformance at the gate.
Every rate and factor change is checked against the filed band before it can go live. A value outside the filing fails at the gate. No human is asked to notice it later.
Names, with the why.
Each change carries who proposed it, who reviewed it, and who approved it, with the reason in their words. Overrides are the same: allowed where the plan allows them, receipted every time.
Which rater priced this policy.
Every quote and every bound policy points at the exact rating version that produced it. The broker’s stale copy stops being a risk, because there is no copy: there is a system and a record.
The workbook becomes the spec. Your quote history becomes the test suite.
One factor change,
tied to its filing.
This is the shape of every change once the rater is a system. Fixture data; the fields are real.
Fixture data. A multiplier outside the filed band would have failed at the gate. Download the sample evidence pack (PDF, fixture data)
Mapped to the reviews
a rater already sits.
The workbook, or the system.
Fast to change. Impossible to prove.
One file, many copies. Formula edits with no author. Filed-rate checks done by memory. The exam answer is a reconstruction, and the person who could reconstruct it is the one who’s leaving.
Just as fast to change. Provable by construction.
A rating API and a rater screen your underwriters use, in your environment, with the conformance check at the gate. Fixed fee, tested against your own quotes, and yours when it ships.
The governed first build.
One backlog item. Fully governed. Evidence included.
One rating workbook, ported and tested against your quote history, with the filed-rate check at the gate and a receipt per change. The next workbooks run on the same line.
Scoped to the project and quoted in the first conversation. Agreed before anything starts. No time-and-materials meter running.
From scoping to production-acceptable delivery, live in your environment.
Two deliverables, always paired: the working software, and the evidence pack. Show the board AI progress; show the examiners the receipts.
The process guarantee: your team reviews and approves every change. Nothing merges ungoverned. Nothing leaves for a broker or a carrier without a named human release.
Two ways to run it afterward: we operate the line for teams with no engineering bench, or your team operates it and we train your operator. The software, the map, and the receipts are yours in either mode. You walk at renewal with everything. The first cohort of five is filling now
What you’ll want to know.
We have fourteen workbooks. Where do you start?
With the one the examiner asks about most, or the one that prices the most premium. The first build ports that workbook; the next ones run on the same line, by your team or ours, the same way.
Do underwriters lose the ability to override?
No. Overrides are allowed where your rating plan allows them, and every override is receipted with the person and the why. That is the difference between an override and an undocumented deviation.
Will this change our rates?
It must not. The workbook becomes the spec: each tab’s logic is ported and tested against your own quote history until the system rates what the workbook rated. Drift from the filed rate is the finding this build prevents, not one it introduces.
Who owns the rating engine afterward?
You do: the code, the tests, the map, and the receipts. After the build it runs as governed operations, operated by us or by your team after we train your operator, and you walk at renewal with everything.
How long, and what does it cost?
Four to eight weeks for the first workbook, fixed fee agreed before anything starts and quoted in the first conversation. Pricing lives in that conversation, not on this page.
Bring us the workbook.
Tell us the line it rates and the filing it should conform to. Scoping is a conversation, the fee is fixed before anything starts, and the first review is on your calendar before we write a line.
No newsletter. No drip sequence. Every request gets a real reply within one business day, from someone who can answer it.
