Insuraviews

Strategic Rate-Making: Turning Regulatory Psychology into Competitive Advantage for P&C Carriers

May 19, 2025

Executive Insight

Carriers that fine-tune the overall percentage change they request—rather than defaulting to familiar round numbers—can shorten review cycles by 25-55 days, unlocking millions in earlier earned premium and lower carrying costs. Our analysis of >25 000 filings from the top-25 writers since 2019 shows clear “speed bumps” in regulators’ turnaround times at the 10%, 20%, and 25% thresholds (Figures 1 & 2).

Figure 1 - Days to Approval and Count of Filings by Rate Impact

‍

Figure 2 - Average Days to Approval by Rate Impact

‍

Why do a few decimal points matter?

HTML Table Generator

Leverage point	Evidence from filings (% rate increases)	Value unlocked
Regulatory psychology - reviewers treat rates just above round numbers as "materially higher," triggering deeper actuarial challenge rounds.	Mean approval time jumps from 71 days at 19.7% to 127 days at 20.6% (+79%) on a like-for-like state/product mix.	~8 weeks of earlier premium recognition; faster booking improves combined ratio.
Work-in-process inventory - every extended filing ties up actuarial, legal, and product resources.	25% requests average 82 days vs. 57 days for a 24.7% ask.	Time savings that can be invested elsewhere.
Capital cost & cash-flow timing - later effective dates delay cash receipts.	Moving a 20.5% filing forward by 55 days at a 6% cost of capital yields large savings potential.	Aggregate savings scale across multi-state portfolios.

‍

Strategic playbook

Micro-segment the request
Exploit "safe" bins
Align actuarial narrative
Institutionalize rate-impact analysis

Bottom-Line Impact

Across a national personal-lines book, trimming even 30 days from the average approval lag accelerates ~$500M in premium by one month—worth $2.5-4M in pretax income and freeing scarce actuarial capacity for growth work. Strategic rate-making is thus a low-cost, high-ROI lever that complements, but does not replace, sound actuarial indication. The carriers that master it will cycle capital faster, capture market shifts sooner, and out-run slower rivals mired on regulators’ desks.

State Spotlight — California amplifies the “speed-bump” effect

California’s prior-approval regime under Proposition 103 takes the time-penalty for “round-number” requests from inconvenient to business-critical (Figure 3)

Figure 3 - Average Days to Approval by Rate Impact for California

HTML Table Generator

Rate-change band	Mean approval lag	∆ vs. sub-20% requests	Comment
≤19.9%	≈210 days	-	Still slow by national standards but broadly predictable.
20.0 - 24.9%	≈380 days	+170 days (~8 months)	Extra discovery rounds, frequent consumer-intervener challenges.
≥25%	400-1400 days (peaks in Figure 3)	+1-3 years	Outliers driven by handful of filings, but the risk is material.

‍

Implications for carriers writing in CA

- Micro-tune the ask: A 19.8% statewide filing can reach the books ~6 months faster than a 20.3% request—worth $3-5M NPV per $250 M of premium.

- Break large moves into sequenced filings: Carve a 28% indicated need into two bites (e.g., 19.7% now, 6-9% follow-on) to avoid consumer-intervener hearings while still achieving the full target within a policy year.

- Front-load actuarial narrative & stakeholder outreach: When an above-threshold increase is unavoidable, pre-wire the Department of Insurance and key intervener groups with granular cost drivers (cat loss trend, reinsurance, wildfire mitigation) to shorten the inevitable discovery process.

- Factor volatility into planning: Because some bins above 20% are built on <10 filings, spikes to 1,000 + days may not repeat—but the option value of staying below the trigger is overwhelmingly positive.

‍

California already accounts for up to 12% of national personal-auto written premium; letting a filing languish for an extra year can erase the margin from an entire product line. Strategic rate-making therefore delivers outsized ROI in the Golden State—turning regulatory psychology into a decisive speed advantage over less disciplined competitors.

‍

Competitive benchmark — even Progressive trips over the same “round-number” speed bumps

Progressive is widely seen as the industry’s gold-standard on rate-filing execution—yet its own data show that scale and sophistication do not inoculate a carrier from the approval-lag penalties tied to psychologically salient rate bands.

Figure 4 - Number of Filings by Rate Impact for Progressive

Figure 5 - Days to Approval by Rate Impact for Progressive

‍Observation from Progressive filings

HTML Table Generator

Observation from Progressive filings	What the figures show	Strategic takeaway
Heavy clustering at familiar round numbers	>70% of Progressive's filings fall into bins centered on 5%, 6%, 8%, 10% and 12% impacts (Figure 4). Filing activity drops sharply once the requested change creeps above ~12%	Even top carriers default to "clean" numbers; the behavioural bias is industry-wide, not company-specific.
Noticeable approval-time spikes just above 15% and 20%	Mean days to approval hold in the 60-110 day range for <15% increases - but jump to >250 days in the 17-18% bin and exceed 500 days in a 22-23% bin (Figure 5).	Progressive incurs the same multi-month penalty that smaller carriers face when they nudge past unspoken regulatory thresholds.
Limited sample size does not eliminate risk	Above 17%, most bins contain <10 filings, yet lag volatility explodes - highlighting that even a small number of outlier reviews can derail portfolio-level timing.	Reliance on historical averages is dangerous; each individual filing must be optimized ex-ante to control tail-risk.

‍

What this means for the broader market

1. No one has fully cracked the code – If Progressive’s actuarial and regulatory affairs machine still accepts 6-10 month delays in exchange for “nice” rate impacts, there is ample white space for carriers willing to micro-tune requests in 10–25 bp increments.
2. First-mover advantage remains – A disciplined, analytics-driven rate-setting approach can let a mid-tier carrier beat even the largest writers to market by multiple months—translating into earlier premium recognition and pricing responsiveness.
3. “Good enough” isn’t – The data underscore that scale, regulatory relationships and brand reputation do not fully offset the cognitive triggers embedded in round-number filings.
4. Systematic optimization is the only reliable hedge against elongated approval cycles.

In short, Progressive’s experience demonstrates that the speed-bump effect is structural, not incidental. Carriers that deliberately target the empirically “fast” bins can capture a timing dividend that even the market leader is leaving on the table.

‍

Conclusion

The evidence is clear: strategic rate-making, by focusing on the psychological nuances of regulatory review, offers a tangible competitive edge for P&C carriers. By understanding and proactively addressing the "speed bumps" associated with round-number rate requests, carriers can significantly shorten approval cycles, unlock millions in earlier earned premium, and free up valuable internal resources. This data-driven approach is not merely a tweak but a powerful lever that complements sound actuarial practices, allowing carriers to accelerate capital cycles, swiftly adapt to market shifts, and ultimately outmaneuver less agile rivals.