5 ms·
Product comparison: that’s fair – only so much you can fit in an announcement post. We completely agree it is difficult to compare benefits (even for competent
by jstartz26 5y ago
Product comparison: that’s fair – only so much you can fit in an announcement post. We completely agree it is difficult to compare benefits (even for competent HR departments) but it is even more confusing for individuals. We try to make this clearer and transparent when working with employers during the quoting process. Benefit coverage gets boiled down to “actuarial value” and quantified as a number relative to the benefits mandated under the Affordable Care Act. This is presented alongside the financial quote and compared to competing bids. It also helps to actually read through our Schedule of Benefits Coverage– even at the individual level it is apparent what the differences are in our benefit plan vs every other SBC we have seen.
If you were to judge the quality only by price (all else equal), underwriting for this segment is done at the employer level – so savings can vary significantly from company to company. We’ve had quotes that matched other bids, and we’ve presented offers as much as 35% less (on a cash basis, not actuarial) than other insurer’s annual price hikes.
Overall, I cannot agree more with your comment that comparison is hard. There is not a lot of transparency in this market segment because of the unique considerations that go into underwriting each group. Plus, a lot of the companies (startups included) that people find appealing are playing games with coverage, especially playing around with deductibles and copays. It’s currently very difficult to make it super clear without just sitting down with the person/employer and talking through the benefits.
- pierre 5y agoRegarding product comparaison it is possible to build a computable model of your policy and the major competitor, and from there automatically benchmark them to find key difference in coverage (what is the maximum delta) or running them through a set predefined claim scenario. It will however require ~3-5 day of work per policy to build the models. Beyond the marketing effort this models can also be reused for risk management / claim management / leakage prevention if implemented right.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mjamilkowski 5y agoYes it would be possible - and I know of a couple of benefits consultants that have tried to do this, but bias and independence is a vexing issue. Keep the ideas coming!