When a retail broker sends a complex commercial risk to the wholesale market, the question of cost tends to follow. New data from Conning, Inc. gives a direct answer. Over the five years from 2021 to 2025, the total non-loss cost ratio for a composite of wholesale-focused insurers was 1.4 percentage points lower than a comparable retail composite. The study was commissioned by the Wholesale and Specialty Insurance Association (WSIA) and drew on statutory financial filings rather than self-reported data, covering 107 wholesale-focused companies representing $76 billion in premium and 165 retail-focused companies representing $110 billion.
The 1.4-point advantage is smaller than the 1.8-point gap Conning found in its 2021 analysis. But the direction has not changed across any of the three studies, which now cover data from 2010 through 2025. The 2021 study found a 1.8-point wholesale advantage, according to WSIA’s published summary of that analysis.
The wholesale composite’s median commission ratio ran 2.7 percentage points above retail over the study period. That premium is offset by lower costs everywhere else. Wholesale non-commission expenses, covering taxes, other acquisition costs, and general expenses, averaged 3.7 points below retail. The net result held in every single year of the study, with the wholesale advantage ranging from 1.1 points in 2025 to 2.2 points in 2022.
The tax differential accounts for a meaningful share of the gap. Wholesale-channel policies are typically nonadmitted and subject to surplus lines taxes, which are generally lower than the premium taxes retail carriers pay on admitted business. That structural difference is part of what drives the non-commission cost advantage, and it has been consistent across all three Conning studies.
One structural note Conning flags: the composites differ in business mix and company size. Other liability accounts for 54% of wholesale composite direct premiums written versus 31% for retail, and larger carriers dominate the wholesale group. Conning used median rather than average measurements to limit the distorting effect of size, but the composition differences mean the comparison is not a controlled experiment. The consistency of the finding across 16 years of data, however, suggests the direction is durable.
The timing of the study’s release gives the numbers additional relevance. Retail consolidation in the US is intensifying, and wholesale brokers are increasingly being asked to prove their value beyond market access as acquisition-driven preferred-partner programs standardize internal placement decisions. The cost argument has always been part of that conversation, and 16 years of statutory data gives it a more durable footing than any single survey.
The surplus lines market closed 2025 at a record $143.3 billion in direct premium written, up 10.4% from $129.8 billion the year before, with wholesale brokers without binding authority remaining the primary surplus lines channel at 45% of premium. That scale means the cost differential, however narrow, aggregates into a material figure across a large volume of placements.
Premium growth data from the Conning study adds one more layer. The wholesale composite outpaced retail in direct premium growth in four of the five years studied, before the two converged in 2025 at roughly 3.3% and 3.4% respectively. That growth pattern reflects the channel absorbing a rising volume of complex risks that the admitted market no longer wants to price.
“Sixteen years of data illustrate the value wholesalers bring to the transaction and why retail agents should leverage a wholesale specialist to find the right solution for complex risks,” said Patrick Albrecht, president of Associated Insurance Administrators, Inc. in Montgomery, Alabama, and WSIA chair.
