Chubb vs 
Harper: How Do They Compare for Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance?
Harper reads a policy's exclusions line by line before you buy and says it can issue a certificate the same day. Chubb underwrites Pro ERM, covering 100% of defense costs worldwide.
Harper serves advice, design and decision businesses and says it can issue a certificate the same day when a client contract requires E&O; Chubb Pro ERM targets non-licensed firms and lists disciplinary and personal-injury coverage. 3,1
What Are the Key Differences Between Chubb and Harper Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance?
Choose Based on Your Work and Contract Deadline
Harper says it serves consultants, agencies, technology firms and licensed professionals whose work involves advice, design or decisions. Chubb names associations, consultants and event planners as examples of non-licensed firms for Pro ERM. If a client contract requires proof of E&O the same day, Harper says it can place matching coverage and issue the certificate that day. 3 1
Compare Policy Review With Listed Features
Harper says it reads exclusions line by line before purchase, since policies with the same limit can respond differently to a claim. Chubb lists disciplinary-proceedings defense and personal-injury coverage as Pro ERM features. Ask Harper for the actual exclusions in its proposed policy and Chubb for the wording and limits that apply to those features. 3 1
How You Get a Quote
Harper describes manual policy review and contract-matched coverage. Chubb routes Pro ERM through agents and brokers using Cyber Central or Marketplace. The reviewed Chubb page does not describe same-day certificate issuance, so ask about timing if your contract deadline is immediate. 3 1
What Should You Confirm in Chubb and Harper Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance Quotes?
- Ask Harper for the actual exclusions list and whether it can issue your client certificate the same day. 3
- Confirm whether your firm meets Chubb's non-licensed Pro ERM eligibility definition and request its liability limit. 1
- Compare the quoted policy wording for disciplinary proceedings and personal injury, including limits and exclusions. 1 3
Chubb vs Harper Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance Compared
Chubb vs Harper: Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance: documented features by provider
| Criteria | Chubb Pro ERM (Professional Enterprise Risk Management) | Harper Professional Liability Insurance |
|---|---|---|
| Who It’s For | Chubb says Pro ERM is available to non-licensed professional-services firms of all sizes, naming examples including associations, consultants, business process administrators, event planners, interior and graphic design firms, marketing and PR firms, printers, staffing firms, travel agents and trustees. 1Company-reported. Pro ERM Target Clients list. | Harper targets consultants, agencies, tech firms and licensed professionals whose work product is advice, design or a decision, since general liability doesn't cover a client claiming that work caused a financial loss. 3Company-reported. Professional liability page introduction and FAQ distinguishing it from general liability. |
| How to Apply | Agents and brokers can quote Pro ERM through Chubb's Cyber Central or Marketplace quoting platforms. 1Company-reported. Cyber Insurance Coverage & Products page quoting section. | You request a quote online or by phone; if a client contract requires E&O, Harper says it places coverage matching that requirement and issues the certificate the same day. 3Company-reported. Professional liability page quote form and FAQ 'My client contract requires E&O. What now?'. |
| Coverage Features | Beyond the Cyber ERM base, Chubb says Pro ERM adds E&O coverage including personal injury from professional services, a broadened definition of professional services that expressly includes professional technology services, coverage for independent contractors performing duties on the insured's behalf, automatic additional-insured status for clients when required by contract, and coverage for professional disciplinary proceedings. 1Company-reported. Pro ERM Product Features list; subject to the policy as issued. | Harper describes coverage for errors and omissions in the work itself, negligence allegations about professional judgment, and legal defense costs, with limits it says are matched to the client contracts that require the policy. 3,4Company-reported. Professional liability page's four coverage tiles; the E&O page adds that claims often surface a year or more after the work was delivered. The issued policy and its exclusions control actual scope. |
| Role in This Line | Chubb underwrites professional errors and omissions coverage through Pro ERM, a single policy combining professional liability, media and cyber exposures for non-licensed professional-services firms. 1Company-reported. Cyber Insurance Coverage & Products page, Professional Enterprise Risk Management section. | Harper places professional liability coverage as a broker, writing the policy around the applicant's actual services rather than underwriting it, and describes a specialist handling the placement. 3Company-reported. Professional liability page introduction and 'Why Harper' section. Harper markets the identical policy under two catalogue entries, "Professional Liability" and "Errors and Omissions"; the E&O page states it is the same policy, just named what a given industry calls it. 4,5Company-reported. Coverage directory listing plus the E&O page's own description; a naming convention Harper states about itself, not a distinction between two products. |
| Risk Services | Chubb says Pro ERM policyholders get access to legal counsel with extensive professional-liability experience, in addition to the general cyber-incident-response services shared with Cyber ERM. 1Company-reported. Pro ERM Product Features list. | Harper says it reads a policy's exclusions line by line before a client buys, because two E&O policies with the same limit can respond very differently to the same claim. 3Company-reported. Professional liability page 'We know this' section; a described review practice, not an independently verified outcome. |
