What COI Tracking Will Look Like in 2030

Predictions are dangerous to put in writing because they age in public. But there's enough movement in this category right now that it's worth taking a position on where it's going. If you're making a multi-year platform decision today, betting on the right direction matters more than picking the best current product.

Here's what we think changes between now and 2030, what doesn't, and what it means for buyers.

Prediction 1: Carrier-direct verification becomes table stakes

The biggest structural change underway is verification source migration. The current state: most COI tracking is still based on PDF certificates as the source of truth, with broker outreach as a secondary verification mechanism. The future state: carrier-direct integrations replace certificates as the primary verification mechanism for the largest carriers.

We're already seeing the early version of this. TrustLayer's partnership with Nationwide is the most public example — for vendors insured by Nationwide, certificate data flows directly from the carrier's systems. Other carriers will follow because the operational case is compelling on both sides: carriers reduce certificate-issuance overhead, customers get more reliable data, and the broker layer (which has been a friction source) gets disintermediated for the routine cases.

The implication for buyers: carrier integration breadth will become a major platform differentiator. Today it's an emerging feature. By 2030, platforms without meaningful carrier integration will be relegated to long-tail vendors only.

The losers in this shift are platforms that built their "real-time" claims on broker AMS data. As we've written elsewhere, AMS-based "real-time" was always shallow — penetration is low, data lags real coverage, and the architecture is fundamentally a workaround rather than a solution. As carrier-direct integration scales, AMS-based platforms will look increasingly outdated.

Prediction 2: Document-based COI tracking doesn't disappear

But — and this is important — the certificate doesn't go away. Most vendors will not be insured by carriers with direct integrations. Long-tail commercial insurance, international coverage, specialty lines, smaller carriers — all of this will continue to require document-based verification.

By 2030, the leading platforms will operate hybrid models: carrier-direct for the top 20-30 carriers (covering 60-70% of common commercial vendors), broker-network verification for the next layer, and document-based verification for the long tail. The document part doesn't go away; it just becomes a smaller share of the workflow.

This matters because some current vendors are positioning themselves around the post-document future too aggressively. The reality is that documents will be part of the workflow for the next decade at least. Platforms that abandon document handling will find themselves unable to support real customer needs.

Prediction 3: AI use cases narrow but deepen

We've written about the gap between AI hype and AI reality in this category. By 2030, the AI conversation will have matured. The vendors making vague claims about AI will either have built real capabilities or will have been outcompeted by vendors that did.

Specific AI use cases we expect to mature:

Document understanding. OCR-plus-context extraction will become reliable enough to handle non-standard documents (international certificates, broker letters, manually formatted documents) that current systems struggle with.
Compliance reasoning. Rather than rule-based compliance checks, LLM-driven reasoning that can interpret contract language and compare it to coverage language. This is the highest-impact use case and the hardest to build.
Anomaly detection. Pattern recognition for fraud and irregularity that goes beyond rule-based checks.
Vendor communication. AI-driven outreach that adapts tone and approach to vendor responsiveness, rather than blasting templated emails.

What probably won't pan out: AI doing the whole job. The risk management profession isn't going away. AI will be a productivity layer for skilled people, not a replacement for the function.

Prediction 4: The vendor experience becomes a competitive battleground

Currently, vendor experience varies wildly across platforms. Some (TrustLayer, bcs) have invested in low-friction submission flows. Others (Jones with their auto-outreach, several legacy platforms) have reputations for vendor friction. Buyers tolerate this friction because there's no good alternative.

By 2030, vendor experience becomes a primary competitive vector. Why: vendors are getting tired of having to manage compliance across dozens of buyer platforms, each with different requirements and friction levels. Network effects favor platforms with the broadest vendor adoption — once a vendor has their information in TrustLayer (or whatever the dominant platform is), getting their info into a smaller competitor is more friction than the buyer's contract is worth.

This is already happening. The platforms with large vendor networks (TrustLayer's 298,000+ verified vendors; Jones for CRE; bcs for certain segments) are pulling ahead because vendor pre-existence on the platform reduces onboarding friction. Smaller platforms struggle because every new buyer is also asking vendors to start from scratch.

By 2030, expect 2-3 dominant platforms with large vendor networks, plus specialty platforms for specific use cases. The mid-market platforms get squeezed.

Prediction 5: Pricing models shift from per-vendor to outcome-aligned

Most current pricing is some variant of per-vendor or per-record charges. This is a workflow-tool pricing model — you pay for the volume of records being managed.

We expect a shift toward outcome-aligned pricing. Examples:

Risk-weighted pricing. Cheaper for low-risk vendors, more expensive for high-risk verification.
Verification-tier pricing. Cheaper for document-only, more expensive for carrier-verified.
Outcome guarantees. Service-level commitments around verification accuracy or fraud detection, with pricing structured around those outcomes.
Premium-impact pricing. Some integration with the broker channel where program quality affects E&O rates, with platforms participating in the savings.

Per-vendor pricing has the perverse incentive of making customers want fewer vendors tracked, which doesn't align with risk reduction. As the category matures, expect more sophisticated pricing.

Prediction 6: Broker channels evolve, not disappear

Some commentary suggests carrier-direct integration disintermediates brokers. We don't think that's right. Brokers are intermediaries on the placement and policy side, not just the certificate side. They provide value (advice, claims advocacy, market knowledge) that doesn't get replaced by integrations.

What does change: the broker's role in the COI workflow. Today, brokers spend significant time issuing and reissuing certificates, fielding compliance inquiries, and chasing endorsements. As carrier-direct integration scales, this routine work decreases. Brokers can focus on higher-value advisory work and more sophisticated risk management.

The brokers we talk to mostly welcome this shift. The certificate issuance work has been an unprofitable headache for years. Direct integration removes the headache, leaving the work brokers actually enjoy.

Prediction 7: Construction, healthcare, and CRE diverge into specialized platforms

Today, most COI tracking platforms are general-purpose with vertical configurations. By 2030, expect more vertical specialization. Construction has different needs (multi-tier subs, wrap-up policies, site-specific compliance), healthcare has different needs (BAA tracking, regulatory layers), CRE has different needs (lease compliance, multi-tenant property management). The general-purpose platforms will continue to exist, but vertical-specialized platforms will gain share where the vertical complexity is high.

This is good for buyers — better tools for specific needs — but it complicates platform selection. The right answer for a CRE portfolio may not be the right answer for a manufacturing operation. We expect comparison tools like ours to become more important, not less, as the category fragments.

Prediction 8: Fraud detection becomes a marketing emphasis

COI fraud detection is currently a quiet capability. By 2030, expect it to become a marketing emphasis. As more buyers discover (often through claims) that their compliance dashboards were measuring document collection rather than actual coverage, fraud detection will move from "thing nobody mentions" to "thing platforms compete on."

The platforms with strongest fraud detection will be the ones with carrier integrations (because they verify against the source) and large vendor networks (because they have cross-customer data to detect anomalies). This compounds the advantages of the dominant platforms.

Prediction 9: Consolidation accelerates

We've already seen meaningful consolidation in the category. SmartCompliance, Veriforce, Jones — multiple acquisitions in the past few years. We expect this to continue. Reasons:

Technology capital intensity is rising (AI, integrations, fraud detection all require investment).
Network effects favor scale.
The mid-market is getting squeezed between the leaders and the specialists.

By 2030, expect 4-6 major platforms in the COI tracking space, plus a handful of vertical specialists. The current crowded mid-market consolidates significantly.

What this means for buyers today

If you're making a platform decision today with a 3-5 year horizon, a few implications:

Carrier integration capability matters. Platforms investing in carrier-direct verification today are betting on the future direction. Platforms relying on AMS-based "real-time" claims are not.
Vendor network size matters. Onboarding friction compounds over time. A platform with a large pre-existing vendor network reduces friction for every new vendor relationship.
AI claims should be evaluated specifically. Vague AI claims today are rarely meaningful. Specific use cases with demonstrable performance are.
Vertical fit matters. General-purpose platforms work; vertical-specialized platforms often work better for specific needs. Pick based on your actual use case, not the most generic option.
Pricing flexibility matters. Multi-year contracts with rigid pricing structures may look penny-wise today and look pound-foolish by 2028 when the category has shifted.

The bigger picture

COI tracking is mid-evolution. The category is moving from a workflow problem (managing documents) toward a risk reduction discipline (verifying coverage). The platforms that lead the next phase are the ones investing in real verification, real vendor experience, and real category expertise. The platforms that fall behind are the ones marketing their way through the transition without building the underlying capabilities.

Whichever platform you pick, that's the criterion to apply: are they building toward the future direction or marketing around it?

Our research tries to surface that distinction. So does industry coverage from sources like the Brick by Brick podcast, broker analysis, and primary customer interviews. Use multiple sources, take strong claims with appropriate skepticism, and bet on the platforms with substance behind the marketing.

— The RiskStack Team