Softwr

Insurance · head to head

InsuredMine vs Riskonnect

InsuredMine logo

InsuredMine

Insurance

Sales pipeline and client engagement layer that sits on top of an agency management system

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Riskonnect logo

Riskonnect

Insurance

Integrated risk management and claims administration for corporate risk teams

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: InsuredMine integration depth varies by agency management system, so capability demonstrated on one platform may not exist on yours and must be tested against live data before purchase.; Riskonnect total first year cost is dominated by implementation rather than licence; vendor professional services frequently approach the annual licence figure and the internal staff time to define data structures and migrate historic claims is a comparable third cost that never appears in the quote.
  • They diverge on capability: InsuredMine covers Agency management system sync, Riskonnect covers Claims administration.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which InsuredMine and Riskonnect actually diverge.

Attributes where InsuredMine and Riskonnect differ
AttributeInsuredMineRiskonnect

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), platforms (Web, iOS, Android), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Insurance).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in InsuredMine

  • Agency management system sync
  • Sales pipelines
  • Automated campaigns
  • Client portal and mobile app
  • Renewal and X-date tracking
  • Producer analytics

Only in Riskonnect

  • Claims administration
  • Total cost of risk reporting
  • Policy and exposure management
  • Enterprise risk management
  • Health and safety
  • Business continuity
  • Third party risk
  • Data integration

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

InsuredMine

  • An agency tracking new business pipeline and cross-sell that the agency management system does not report onnot Riskonnect
  • A commercial agency managing prospect expiry dates alongside the in-force booknot Riskonnect
  • An agency running renewal and birthday campaigns without exporting lists to a separate email toolnot Riskonnect
  • A principal who wants producer activity reporting the agency management system cannot producenot Riskonnect

Riskonnect

  • A self insured employer that wants to own its workers compensation loss data rather than depend on the broker or TPA system it will lose at renewalnot InsuredMine
  • A risk manager building a defensible total cost of risk figure for the CFO across claims, premium, retained losses and collateralnot InsuredMine
  • A third party administrator running claims for multiple clients that needs separate entity structures on one platformnot InsuredMine
  • A multinational consolidating claims, safety incidents and enterprise risk registers onto one entity hierarchy for board reportingnot InsuredMine

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

InsuredMine

  • Integration depth varies by agency management system, so capability demonstrated on one platform may not exist on yours and must be tested against live data before purchase.
  • It adds a second place where client data lives, and when the sync disagrees with the agency management system staff have to know which one to trust.
  • It cannot repair poor data hygiene in the underlying system; duplicate clients and missing expiry dates simply propagate into the pipeline.
  • Pricing is per user, so agencies with many part-time or service-only staff pay for seats that generate no pipeline activity.
  • It depends on continued integration access to systems built by Applied and Vertafore, both of whom sell competing sales and marketing modules, which is a strategic dependency outside the vendor control.

Riskonnect

  • Total first year cost is dominated by implementation rather than licence; vendor professional services frequently approach the annual licence figure and the internal staff time to define data structures and migrate historic claims is a comparable third cost that never appears in the quote.
  • The platform grew through acquisitions including Ventiv and Sword GRC, so module interfaces and administration models are not uniform and staff trained on one module do not transfer cleanly to another.
  • Licensing is modular, so the price quoted for a claims deployment rises materially the first time the risk team wants ERM or business continuity, and there is little negotiating leverage once the claims data is migrated.
  • Configuration depth means most changes go through an administrator or the vendor rather than an end user, and risk teams without a dedicated system administrator find that change requests queue for weeks.
  • Historic claims data migration quality depends entirely on what the outgoing broker or TPA will export, and incomplete legacy data undermines the multi year trend reporting that was the reason for buying.

Pricing, plan by plan

InsuredMine

On request
  • InsuredMine$undefined/year
    • Pipeline and CRM
    • Agency management system integration
    • Campaign automation

Riskonnect

On request
  • Riskonnect Platform$undefined/year
    • Licensed by module, named user count and entity structure
    • Claims administration and RMIS core
    • Optional ERM, safety, continuity and third party risk modules

Which should you pick?

Choose InsuredMine if

  • You need agency management system sync.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want sales pipelines.
InsuredMine review

Choose Riskonnect if

  • You need claims administration.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want total cost of risk reporting.
Riskonnect review

Questions people ask

Is InsuredMine or Riskonnect better?
Neither clearly leads. InsuredMine starts at On request and Riskonnect at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, InsuredMine or Riskonnect?
InsuredMine starts at On request and Riskonnect at On request.
Does InsuredMine or Riskonnect run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, iOS, Android, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
What is InsuredMine best used for?
InsuredMine is most often used for an agency tracking new business pipeline and cross-sell that the agency management system does not report on, a commercial agency managing prospect expiry dates alongside the in-force book, an agency running renewal and birthday campaigns without exporting lists to a separate email tool, a principal who wants producer activity reporting the agency management system cannot produce. Of those, an agency tracking new business pipeline and cross-sell that the agency management system does not report on and a commercial agency managing prospect expiry dates alongside the in-force book are not what Riskonnect is typically brought in for.
What can InsuredMine do that Riskonnect cannot?
InsuredMine covers Agency management system sync, Sales pipelines, Automated campaigns, Client portal and mobile app. Riskonnect covers Claims administration, Total cost of risk reporting, Policy and exposure management, Enterprise risk management.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

InsuredMine: Does it replace our agency management system?

No, and it does not try to. Policy history and carrier download stay in the agency management system; InsuredMine adds the sales and engagement layer on top.

Riskonnect: What does Riskonnect actually cost?

Nothing is published. Reported deals range from roughly 35,000 US dollars a year for a narrow deployment to well over 250,000 for a multi module enterprise programme, with implementation services quoted separately and often of similar magnitude in year one.

InsuredMine: Which agency management systems does it work with best?

It connects to Applied Epic, AMS360, EZLynx and HawkSoft, but the depth of each connection differs. Insist on a trial against your own system before committing.

Riskonnect: How long does implementation take?

Three to six months is typical for a claims and RMIS deployment, longer where historic loss data from several brokers or TPAs has to be normalised.

InsuredMine: Is it worth it for a small agency?

If pipeline and renewal follow-up currently live in spreadsheets, usually yes. If your agency management system already reports adequately on those, the overlap is larger than the gain.

Riskonnect: Why not just use the broker supplied RMIS?

Because you lose it when you change broker, and the data model serves the broker reporting rather than yours. Owning the system is the main reason companies pay for one.

Riskonnect: Is it a GRC platform or a claims system?

Both, but the claims and insurable risk core is the mature part. If you want pure GRC without claims, you are buying more platform than you need.

Share

Related pages

More on InsuredMine

More on Riskonnect

Keep looking

Other head to heads