phidea

Convr vs Counterpart — Underwriting workstation for US insurance, 2026.

Convr (7 named carriers) and Counterpart (3 named carriers) both sit at the underwriting workstation layer. Zero customer overlap in the public roster — they are addressing different segments of the same stack layer.

Last verified 2026-05-29 · methodology

TL;DR

  • Convr has 7 publicly-named carrier deployments; Counterpart has 3. Both at the underwriting workstation layer.
  • Zero customer overlap in the public roster. Convr and Counterpart are addressing different carriers within the same stack layer.
  • Both classified ai-native on Phidea's generation axis.
  • Both independent ownership.
  • Analyst coverage: 1 firm cover both, 2 only Convr, 3 only Counterpart.

Customer overlap

BucketCount
Named on Convr only7
Named on Counterpart only3
Named on both0
of which US-named on at least one side0

Only on Convr

  • Zurich North America (US)
  • Hiscox USA (US)
  • Penn National Insurance (US)
  • Encova Insurance (US)
  • Selective Insurance (US)
  • WCF Insurance (US)
  • Columbia Insurance Group (US)

Only on Counterpart

  • Markel (Evanston Insurance Company) (US)
  • Aspen Specialty Insurance Company (US)
  • Westfield Specialty (US)

Counts derived from 10sourced carrier-deployment entries across both vendor cards. Aggregate-only statements (e.g. “16 of the top 20”) excluded.

Stack position

Generation
ai-native
Stack layer
Underwriting workstation
Founded
2016
Lines
commercial, specialty
Generation
ai-native
Stack layer
Underwriting workstation
Founded
2020
Lines
commercial, specialty

Ownership and corporate context

Counterpart
Type
independent

Source: Insurance Journal

Carrier-segment specialization

Convr — geographic split

  • US
    7

Counterpart — geographic split

  • US
    3

Analyst coverage differential

Both covered by
  • Carrier Management · Convr (2020: DataCubes Becomes Convr, and Its CEO Explains Why) · Counterpart (2021: Counterpart Pulls in $10M to Expand Management Liability Insurance Platform)
Only Convr cited by
  • Reinsurance News (2025: Zurich North America enhances underwriting efficiency with Convr AI)
  • PR Newswire (2025: Convr AI Holds the Universe of Commercial Insurance within Submission Ontology)
Only Counterpart cited by
  • TechCrunch (2021: Insuretech startup Counterpart raises $10M in funding round led by Valor Equity Partners)
  • The Insurer (2025: Counterpart's Hackett: Five years in, doubling down on agentic insurance, MGA partnerships and AI edge)
  • Insurance Journal (2022: Counterpart Raises $30 Million in Series B Funding Round)

Recent news (last 12 months)

No news items in the last 12 months for either tool.

Sourced limitations

  • Convr's total disclosed funding is approximately $18M across two rounds, ending with the $15.2M Series B in November 2019. No later equity rounds have been publicly announced. That capital base is modest compared to well-funded underwriting automation peers, which may constrain the pace of model development and international expansion.
    Source: PR Newswire
  • Convr is a US commercial P&C specialist. Its submission ontology and carrier integrations are built for the US market — standard and specialty commercial lines. It does not serve personal lines, life, health, or workers' comp as primary lines, and no European or Asia-Pacific carrier deployments have been publicly announced.
    Source: Convr
  • Convr's accuracy claim for machine-read data is 91%, which means roughly 1 in 11 data points still requires human review or correction. For high-volume small commercial portfolios this is workable; for complex middle-market risks with long loss-run histories, residual manual touches remain.
    Source: Convr
  • Convr does not replace a policy administration system or rating engine — it sits upstream of those. Carriers that lack mature APIs into their policy admin stack will need integration work to route the structured output Convr produces into downstream underwriting decisions.
    Source: Convr
  • Counterpart is a managing general agent, not a software vendor. Brokers place business with Counterpart and carriers (Markel, Aspen, Westfield Specialty) cede capacity to it — there is no standalone Counterpart underwriting workstation that a carrier can license. The Agentic Insurance tooling is internal to Counterpart's own book.
  • Counterpart writes US small and mid-market management and professional liability only — D&O, EPL, Fiduciary, Crime, Miscellaneous Professional Liability and, more recently, Allied Healthcare Professional Liability and Architects & Engineers. It does not underwrite cyber, property, casualty, or personal lines, and the admitted Westfield program is scoped to nonprofits and SMBs.
  • No Gartner, Celent, Forrester or Novarica coverage of Counterpart appears in public search. Recognition is trade press (TechCrunch, Carrier Management, The Insurer, Insurance Journal, Business Insurance) plus vendor-curated lists (CB Insights Top 50 Insurtech 2024, Inside P&C Underwriting Innovation of the Year 2023) — there is no independent analyst quadrant placement.

Limitations published on Phidea are sourced to the underlying citation and reflect what is publicly named — not an exhaustive list. Consult the vendor card for the full record.

Frequently asked

Do any carriers run both Convr and Counterpart?
Not in Phidea's public roster. Across 10 sourced carrier-deployment entries on both vendor cards, zero carriers appear on both. The two tools are addressing different carriers within the same stack layer.
Who owns Convr and Counterpart?
Convr is independently held. Counterpart is independently held.
Which has more named US carriers?
Convr has the larger publicly-named US roster: Convr 7, Counterpart 3. Public-roster size is a coverage signal, not a quality signal — vendors with stronger NDAs may have larger actual US footprints than the public count shows.
Where are these tools positioned in the insurance stack?
Both sit at the underwriting workstation layer. Convr operates as a standalone vendor; Counterpart operates as a standalone vendor.

Adjacent reading