Marsh vs
Risklytics: How Do They Compare for Business Insurance?
Marsh offers technology and professional-liability brokerage; Risklytics focuses on robotics, hardware and AI and prepares applications for underwriters. Risklytics’ published state list omits California, so California businesses should confirm its service route before applying.
An Overview of Marsh and Risklytics
A California robotics company should confirm who can legally handle the submission before sharing sensitive application details with Risklytics; its reviewed state list does not name California. Risklytics emphasizes explaining robotics and AI risks, while Marsh offers a broader technology practice. 34 36 3 Choose Marsh for broad technology brokerage; choose Risklytics for robotics, hardware or AI submission support after verifying the state route.
What Stands Out About Marsh and Risklytics?
Marsh at a Glance
- Marsh helps companies across industries buy insurance and manage risk, with technology specialists and a U.S./Canada middle-market path through Marsh McLennan Agency. 1,3,18,20Company-reported segmentation and industry marketing. Fortune 500 and revenue statistics on Marsh sites are not used here as independently verified. A middle-market MMA path is not proof that every early-stage Bay Area company will be accepted.
- Marsh places cyber coverage and markets large digital-infrastructure property programs; MMA also brokers executive, property, casualty and benefits coverage. 8,24,4,5,3Direct practice and product pages. Technology-page FAQs about software BOP, fidelity or commercial auto were not used as offering proof. Stratus capacity is company-stated potential access, not a bound limit for a named insured.
Risklytics at a Glance
- Risklytics says it prepares an application from your business description and website for you to review. 33Current official service description; not independently tested or a policy entitlement.
- Risklytics says it checks technology E&O wording for AI exclusions before binding. 40Current official service description; not independently tested or a policy entitlement.
Marsh vs Risklytics Coverage Lines Compared
A listing may be arranged through an insurer or partner. “Not listed” means we have no separate offering page for it; ask the provider whether it can quote the coverage and request the policy terms.
Marsh and Risklytics Coverage, Line by Line
Open what Marsh and Risklytics each publish for one coverage line.
Commercial Property Insurance
Cyber Insurance
D&O Insurance
General Liability Insurance
Intellectual Property Insurance
Tech E&O Insurance
Workers’ Compensation Insurance
Marsh and Risklytics Reliability Scores
Each score uses the criteria for that provider’s role. Providers with more than one role may have a score for each.
Marsh Reliability Scores
No Reliability Score
Risklytics Reliability Scores
Marsh and Risklytics Review Scores for 2026
These averages can combine ratings for different products, locations, and customer groups, including approximate BBB grade conversions. Read each review for its sources, what it covers and how the score is calculated.
Marsh Review Score
Review Score
2 rated sources
Marsh’s global Trustpilot profile has a poor 1.3/5 score. Treat it as a service warning to investigate with your proposed team; it does not isolate US commercial accounts.
Read Marsh reviewsRisklytics Review Score
Review Score
No reviews found
Risklytics has no public customer reviews or ratings that we found, so there is no Review Score. That isn't a bad sign, just not enough to judge.
Read Risklytics reviewsKey Differences Between Marsh and Risklytics
Application Preparation Needs the Founder’s Review
Risklytics says it prepares an application using business descriptions and public information for the customer to check and sign. Marsh describes identifying suitable insurers and negotiating terms. Ask who will document the product’s autonomous functions, physical interaction and customer obligations, and give the technical team an opportunity to correct the submission. A well-presented application still needs insurer acceptance; neither broker’s process establishes coverage for every new technology. 33 38 17
California Placement Remains a Threshold Question
California is absent from Risklytics’ published agency-license table. That does not prove it cannot arrange coverage, but a California-authorized producer and product route need to be identified. Marsh publishes California producer information, although that disclosure does not settle the current insurer or product for this account. Request the legal producer and applicable authority before relying on either proposal. 34 35 19
Wording Review Should Address the Actual Failure
Risklytics says it reviews technology E&O forms and flags AI exclusions. Marsh offers professional-liability design for technology businesses. Give both advisers specific scenarios—such as an erroneous output or failed implementation—and ask them to identify the relevant clauses and unresolved gaps. Neither service description supplies a specimen form or proves that a requested AI loss is insured. 40 13
What Should You Confirm in Marsh and Risklytics Quotes?
Obtain the insurer, California route, accepted activities and proposed endorsements. Define claims assistance and notice contacts with Risklytics, since its public materials don’t spell out a detailed claims procedure. Its no-additional-brokerage-fee statement still leaves insurer or wholesaler charges to check; Marsh’s compensation must likewise be disclosed for the engagement. 35 37 39 18
Marsh vs Risklytics Services Compared
What each provider says about the services you may need
Sources for Marsh vs Risklytics
Comparisons Related to Marsh vs Risklytics
Compare AIG’s insurer group with Marsh’s segmented brokerage and risk-advisory routes for a growing or complex business.
Compare AIG’s commercial insurer offerings with Risklytics’ brokerage for frontier-technology businesses.
Marsh offers technology-sector advice and professional-liability placement; Alliance Risk's E&O review considers major contracts and customer concentration.




