Vertafore Sagitta Alternatives: 8 Options for Large Agencies

Start with the finding that shapes everything below. Nobody in this category publishes a price. We checked five vendor pricing surfaces directly on August 27, 2026 and every one of them came back the same way: no rate card, contact sales. That is not a gap in the research, it is the category's pricing strategy, and it means every number quoted to you is quoted against you rather than against a published list. We label each figure VERIFIED when it was read off the vendor's own page on that date, and REPORTED when it came from a third party the vendor has not confirmed. Where a source has a commercial interest in the answer, we say so in the same cell.

The conflict we are not going to paper over

Two secondary sources publish Sagitta cost estimates and they cannot both be right. One says software starts at $40,000 a year. The other says Vertafore runs $150 to $300 or more per user per month. Hold a 75 seat agency still and run both: the per user figure produces $135,000 to $270,000 a year, while the annual figure produces an implied $44.44 per user per month. That is a gap of three to seven times for the same agency.

We are not averaging them, because averaging two numbers that describe different things produces a third number that describes nothing. Our own reading, and it is an inference from the arithmetic rather than a claim either source makes, is that the $40,000 figure behaves like a floor for the smallest Sagitta deployment rather than a price for a large agency. Which means the model on this page, which uses $40,000, almost certainly understates what you are actually paying. We built it that way deliberately. Every assumption on this page that could be tilted has been tilted toward staying on Sagitta, because a page arguing for a build should not be caught inflating the incumbent.

Normalise it: what a 75 seat agency pays for a year

Per seat and per agency pricing are not comparable until you fix the headcount. Hold one agency at 75 seats, take each published estimate at face value, and ask what a single year costs.

The model below uses the cheapest row in that table, $40,000, for Sagitta. If your invoice says something closer to the per user band, every gap on this page widens in the same direction, and the calculator will show you by how much.

The three year and five year model

Three paths, because those are the three decisions actually available to an agency on Sagitta. Stay and change nothing. Migrate to the one platform built at the same scale. Or keep the system of record and commission the layer that does the work around it. The third path is additive, not a replacement: it does not reduce your Sagitta invoice by a dollar, and the table reflects that by carrying the Sagitta run rate underneath it.

Read that table honestly and the first thing it says is that doing nothing is the cheapest row on it. $120,000 over three years, $200,000 over five, and every other row is more expensive. Nothing we build changes that, because our build does not remove your Sagitta bill. The only reason any other row is worth considering is a cost the table does not contain: the staff hours your agency spends today doing by hand the work the system does not do. We do not have a sourced figure for that, so there is no invented number on this page, and you should not accept one from anybody else either. Measure it in your own agency before you spend anything. Two weeks of honest observation across renewal prep, submission assembly and commission reconciliation will produce a number that is worth more than every estimate on this page combined.

The second thing the table says is against us. At the top of our fee band, $180,000, the build path costs $389,100 over three years, against $305,000 for the cheapest version of an Applied Epic migration. At that price, on cost alone, migrating wins and we would tell you so on the call. The build path only clears a low end migration comfortably at the lower half of our fee band, and it clears a midpoint or high end migration at any price in the band. That distinction is the whole decision, and it turns entirely on a migration figure that comes from a single unconfirmed source, which is why the calculator makes that figure the first thing you can change.

Cumulative spend for the same 75 seat agency, five years out, built entirely from the table above. Sagitta at the reported $40,000 a year with no escalator. Applied Epic at the lowest figure in every reported range, $150,000 of migration paid at year zero, a $75,000 first year and an assumed $40,000 run rate after that, which is the most favourable version of the migration case that the sources allow. And the third line, keeping Sagitta while commissioning a build at $112,500, the midpoint of our fee band, with 16.5 percent a year maintenance stacked on top of the continuing Sagitta run rate.

Three things worth saying about that chart, and only one of them helps us.

The grey line wins. Staying on Sagitta and changing nothing is the cheapest path at every point in the five years, and it never stops being the cheapest, because both of the other paths add cost without removing the management system underneath. If the manual work around your system costs your agency less than about $58,563 a year, which is the annual step on the build line, then the build does not pay for itself and we would rather you find that out from this paragraph than from us.

Against the cheapest possible migration, the build path wins for four years and then loses. The two lines converge at about year 3.9 and roughly $341,000, and by year five the build path is $20,313 more expensive. That is a real result and we are not going to bury it. It is also the most hostile version of the comparison available: it uses the low end of a $150,000 to $500,000 migration range, the low end of a $75,000 to $175,000 first year, and an Applied Epic run rate assumed equal to Sagitta's rather than higher. It also excludes the year of parallel running during a nine to eighteen month migration, when the agency pays for both systems at once. Every one of those choices makes the migration line cheaper than it is likely to be in practice.

Move the migration figure to the midpoint and the picture changes completely. At $325,000 of migration and a $125,000 first year, the migration path reaches $650,000 by year five against $405,313 for keeping Sagitta and building, a gap of $244,688 that never closes. The entire outcome turns on one unconfirmed number from one blog, which is exactly why that number is the first field in the calculator below and why we have printed the caveat next to it rather than in a footnote.

Every default below is a figure from the table above, and every one is editable, because the defaults are a market estimate and your renewal quote is a fact. Nothing is submitted anywhere. There is no email gate, no external request and no stored value. The arithmetic runs in your browser and stops there. If your inputs make the build lose, the tool says so.

One note on the roster before the list. Most published Sagitta alternatives lists have a structural problem: they treat every agency management system as interchangeable regardless of the size of agency it was built for, and they list products from the same vendor as escapes from that vendor. One widely read directory lists eighteen alternatives to Sagitta, at least three of which are Vertafore's own products, and states plainly that it has no reviews for Sagitta at all. Another lists twelve alternatives to Vertafore that include carrier side policy administration systems and individual health insurance marketplaces, which have nothing to do with running an agency. The list below covers what Sagitta actually competes against, and orders it the way an agency holding a Sagitta contract would sensibly evaluate it.

1. Applied Epic

What it is. The genuine head to head competitor, and the only other platform on this page built for the size and complexity of agency Sagitta serves. Applied Systems is Vertafore's principal rival in this category and Epic is its enterprise product.

Price. Nothing published. Applied does not publish Epic pricing and we cross-checked that against our own Applied Epic and EZLynx comparison. REPORTED at a $75,000 to $175,000 first year total including implementation, with a four to twelve month implementation and 100 or more carrier connections, all from a single third party blog.

Best for. Agencies whose complaint is genuinely about Sagitta itself, the workflow, the interface, a specific integration Applied supports and Vertafore does not, or an account relationship that has broken down past repair. It is also the right answer if your carriers and your accounting system integrate more deeply with Applied today, which is a question to ask the carriers rather than either sales team.

Where it falls short. It is the same shape of purchase. Enterprise licensing, no published price, a quote negotiated against you, and an implementation measured in quarters. If the reason you are leaving Sagitta is that per user and per module pricing compounds at renewal, Epic does not address that, it re-homes it. And you pay a migration measured in six figures to arrive there.

Verdict. The only true peer on this page, and a lateral move. Consider it for a product or relationship reason, not for a cost reason. Our Applied Epic alternatives page runs the same arithmetic from the other side of that decision.

2. AMS360, QQCatalyst and Nexsure

What they are. Vertafore products. The same vendor that sells Sagitta. AMS360 is the mid market platform, QQCatalyst the small agency one, and Nexsure another system in the same family. All three appear on published Sagitta alternatives lists, usually without any disclosure that they share a vendor with the product being replaced.

Price. Nothing published for any of them, consistent with the rest of the category.

Best for. There are legitimate reasons to move between Vertafore products, and they are about fit rather than escape. An agency that has shrunk, sold off commercial lines, or found that Sagitta's depth is more platform than it now needs may be genuinely better served on AMS360. That is a right sizing decision and we would not argue with it. Our AMS360 alternatives page covers that platform on its own terms.

Where they fall short. As alternatives to Vertafore, they are not alternatives at all. Same vendor, same account team, same master agreement structure, same renewal dynamics, same road map you do not control. If your complaint is compounding cost at renewal or an enterprise sales motion you cannot get leverage in, moving between two products from the same company resolves none of it, and a list that recommends the move without saying so has not done you a service.

Verdict. Not alternatives. Right sizing options within the same vendor relationship, and worth considering only if that is what you were actually looking for.

3. EZLynx

What it is. An agency management and rating platform built for independent agencies, with strong personal lines comparative rating and a much lighter footprint than either enterprise platform above.

Price. No list pricing published; ezlynx.com/pricing/ describes pricing by user count and product mix with network membership discounts, which we read directly. REPORTED at software from $8,000 a year with a $30,000 to $80,000 first year total by one source, and separately at roughly $200 or more per user per month by a competing vendor. Those two estimates disagree with each other by roughly three to eight times depending on the agency size assumed, and we are flagging that rather than picking one.

Best for. Personal lines heavy agencies, small to mid sized books, and agencies that want a four to eight week implementation rather than a multi quarter project. For that agency EZLynx is a genuinely good product and the reported first year total is a real saving.

Where it falls short. For a Sagitta scale buyer it is a downgrade rather than an alternative, and the clearest indicator is carrier connectivity: 40 or more against Sagitta's 150 or more, both reported. A four to eight week implementation against six to eighteen months is not a faster version of the same product, it is a much smaller product. If you place business with carriers EZLynx does not connect to, the price difference is not a saving, it is scope you dropped.

Verdict. Right answer for a smaller agency. Wrong answer for a large or wholesale one, unless the agency has genuinely shrunk. Our EZLynx automation playbook covers what can be built on top of it.

4. HawkSoft

What it is. An agency management system built around independent agencies, with a reputation for service workflow and a strongly independent agency identity.

Price. Nothing published. hawksoft.com has no rate card and the pricing URL returns a 404, which we checked directly. REPORTED at roughly $135 or more per user per month by a competing agency management vendor that ranks its own product first in the same comparison, so treat it as directional at best.

Best for. Independent agencies of a size where a service centred workflow matters more than enterprise commercial lines depth. Agencies that like it tend to like it a great deal.

Where it falls short. Same segment problem as EZLynx for a Sagitta scale buyer. There is no published evidence, from HawkSoft or anyone else, that it carries wholesale commercial complexity at the scale Sagitta customers run, and we are not going to assert either way on something nobody has documented. Our HawkSoft automation playbook is the build side view of the platform.

Verdict. Worth a look for a much smaller book than Sagitta typically carries. Not a like for like swap.

5. NowCerts

What it is. A cloud agency management system aimed at smaller independent agencies, frequently listed alongside EZLynx and HawkSoft.

Price. Nothing published on nowcerts.com/pricing/, which we read directly. REPORTED at $50 to $100 per user per month by the same competing vendor, which is a small agency price point and consistent with the segment it serves.

Best for. Small agencies that want a modern cloud platform without an enterprise sales cycle.

Where it falls short. The same segment mismatch, and more sharply than the two above it. A $50 to $100 per user per month platform is not carrying the commercial lines and accounting depth that a wholesale operation depends on, and nothing published suggests it claims to.

Verdict. A real product for a real buyer, and that buyer is not you if you are on Sagitta today.

6. AgencyZoom

What it is. A sales, onboarding and retention layer that sits beside an agency management system rather than replacing it. It appears on Vertafore alternatives lists, which is a category error rather than a recommendation.

Price. REPORTED at roughly $99 to $199 per user per month by a competing vendor. Nothing published that we could read directly.

Best for. Agencies that want producer accountability, pipeline visibility and retention workflow layered on top of whatever system of record they already run.

Where it falls short. It is not an agency management system, so it is not an alternative to Sagitta by any definition. If you buy it, you keep paying for Sagitta too, which makes it structurally the same kind of decision as commissioning a build: an additional layer with an additional cost. The difference is that one is rented per user forever and the other is bought once and owned.

Verdict. Not an alternative. A useful adjacent product, and a good illustration of why the lists that include it are not built for a buyer at your scale.

7. Guidewire, Duck Creek and the health insurance marketplaces

What they are. Not agency management systems, and this needs saying because they appear on published Vertafore alternatives lists that agency owners actually read. Guidewire and Duck Creek are carrier side core systems: policy administration, billing and claims for the company writing the risk, not for the agency placing it. eHealth, HealthSherpa, HealthCare.com and Stride Health are individual health insurance marketplaces and enrolment platforms, which have no property and casualty agency relevance at all.

Price. Irrelevant, because none of them does the job.

Why they end up on those lists. Because Vertafore sells into more than one part of the insurance market, and a list assembled from the vendor name rather than the product line sweeps up everything adjacent to the word. It is a useful signal about how carefully any given list was built. If a Sagitta alternatives list is recommending a carrier core system to an agency, the rest of that list deserves the same scepticism.

Verdict. Not options. Included here so that when you see them elsewhere, you know why they are there.

8. A commissioned automation layer you own

What it is. Not a replacement for Sagitta, and we would rather be blunt about that than sell around it. A custom system built for the work that happens around the management system, sitting on top of whichever platform you keep, owned by the agency at handoff. In practice that means renewal preparation, submission assembly across the carrier pool, certificate generation, endorsement and service intake, first notice of loss capture, phone coverage, and commission statement reconciliation. Our insurance automation guide maps which of those durably automate and where each one hits a wall.

Price. A fixed fee of $45,000 to $180,000, set after a free 45-minute diagnosis call and after the integration depth is named, paid in two installments at build start and handoff. A working prototype runs on your real data in seven to ten days before any payment. Production build is five to seven weeks. The agency owns the code, prompts, models and pipeline at handoff and runs it in its own cloud tenant. Those are VERIFIED published terms, not an estimate.

Best for. Agencies whose management system basically works as a system of record and whose real cost is in the manual work stacked around it. If you can name that work in a sentence and attach an hours figure to it, this is the option with the arithmetic behind it.

Where it falls short. Four ways, and they are all on this page already. It does not reduce your Sagitta invoice by a dollar, so it is additive rather than a saving. At the top of our fee band it loses the cost comparison against a cheap migration outright. It needs a named internal owner or it decays. And it does not touch carrier connectivity, regulatory depth or the accounting system of record, which is exactly the part of Sagitta that is hardest to replace and that we are not proposing to replace.

Verdict. The option nobody in the table above can show you, and the only one where the bill stops going up. Worth evaluating precisely when the management system is not the problem.

This is the comparison that comes up in almost every conversation about leaving Sagitta, so rather than send you somewhere else, here it is. Five things are actually checkable and the rest is sales.

Neither publishes a price. We checked both on August 27, 2026. Vertafore has no pricing on its Sagitta product page and Applied does not publish Epic pricing. In a category this mature that is a strategy rather than an oversight, and it means both numbers are quoted against your agency rather than against a list.

On reported figures they are close. First year total of $80,000 to $200,000 for Sagitta against $75,000 to $175,000 for Epic. Implementation of six to eighteen months against four to twelve. Carrier connections of 150 or more against 100 or more. All of that is REPORTED from one third party source, none of it is vendor confirmed, and the ranges overlap so heavily that the difference between them is inside the noise band of a negotiated contract.

The implementation gap is the one real difference in the numbers. Four to twelve months against six to eighteen is meaningfully shorter, and if the pain you are solving is that any change to your platform takes forever, that is worth something. It is worth months, though, not a different cost structure.

The migration is the number that decides it. The only published figure for moving between systems at wholesale complexity is $150,000 to $500,000 over nine to eighteen months, single sourced and unconfirmed. Whatever the real figure is for your agency, it is a six figure toll paid to arrive at a platform with the same licensing model. That is the trade, stated plainly.

How to actually decide. Since price and function are close, decide on integration reality. Ask your carriers, your accounting system vendor and your comparative rater which of the two they work with more deeply today, and ask each of them for an agency running the same combination you would be running. That answer moves the needle more than any feature grid. Our Applied Epic integration playbook and our AMS360 automation playbook document the build side of each platform, which is the view neither sales team leads with.

Each of these is either arithmetic you can check on this page or a structural fact about the two models. Where an argument does not honestly apply to your agency, the section immediately after this one says so, and it is longer than most pages of this kind allow.

One. The math, restated, including the part against us. A subscription never ends. Over five years a 75 seat agency pays $200,000 to stay on Sagitta at the cheapest reported figure, $385,000 to migrate to Applied Epic at the lowest reported migration cost, and $405,313 to keep Sagitta and commission a build at the midpoint of our band. Against the cheapest possible migration the build path wins for four years and then loses by $20,313. Against the midpoint migration it wins by $244,688 and never gives it back. That is the honest range, and the chart above is the reason it is on the page rather than in a deck.

Two. Per user pricing taxes headcount. Every producer and every service hire raises the bill by the same amount whether or not that person generates proportional revenue in year one. A commissioned system has no marginal seat cost at all, so the hiring decision stops carrying a software decision inside it. That matters most in exactly the agencies that are growing, which is to say the ones where the compounding is felt.

Three. Asset versus expense. A subscription is rent and it leaves nothing behind. A commissioned build is a piece of the agency: transferable, valuable in a perpetuation or acquisition conversation, and on the balance sheet rather than only on the expense line. In a market where agency valuations are a live topic in most principals' offices, that difference is not cosmetic.

Four. Built around your book, not the median agency's. Every product in the roundup above is calibrated against the average customer in its category, which is why you pay for the whole feature bundle and then adapt your process to the fraction of it your agency actually uses. A commissioned system starts from your lines of business, your carrier panel, your service standards and your accounting practice. Nobody gets retrained into someone else's assumptions.

Five. What we can and cannot say about the AI line. On most pages of this kind, this is where a vendor's own AI add-on pricing gets cited against it. We cannot do that here honestly, because Vertafore publishes no pricing of any kind, so we do not know what an automation or AI module costs on Sagitta and we are not going to invent a figure. What we can say is structural and checkable: on a per user platform, any capability sold as a module arrives as an additional charge scaled to your headcount, at a rate you cannot benchmark because nobody publishes one. In a commissioned build there is no separate licence for anything, because the system is the thing you bought, and adding a user costs nothing.

Six. Unlimited seats. Producers, service staff, accounting, seasonal help during renewal season, and where appropriate your own clients. Zero marginal cost per person changes the question from who needs a licence to who needs access, which is a better question and usually a different answer.

Seven. Data ownership and no exit toll. Your policies, your history, your documents, your export path, in your own cloud tenant, under an agreement you wrote. Compare that with the migration section below, where the hard part of leaving is not the policies but the history, the accounting and the carrier connections, all of which live inside a structure the vendor designed. Owning the structure takes the negotiation out of leaving.

Eight. Vendor risk you stop carrying. We are not going to manufacture a sunset story here: Sagitta is an actively sold product and we checked. The structural point stands anyway, and this category supplies its own evidence in the form of consolidation: Vertafore alone sells Sagitta, AMS360, QQCatalyst and Nexsure, four agency management systems from one owner, which is what a consolidated category looks like from the inside. Road maps, module bundling and renewal terms in a consolidated category are set by fewer people than they used to be. A system you own is not on anybody's road map but yours.

Nine. Change speed. A change request to your own system is a scoping conversation and a deployment. A change request to a vendor is a queue position behind every other customer, with no committed date and no obligation. When the thing you need changed is the thing that makes your agency different from the one down the road, the queue is not an acceptable answer.

What we can actually prove

Arguments are worth exactly as much as the evidence behind the firm making them, so here is ours with nothing rounded up, including the part that is inconvenient. Our nameable reference is Jim Glaser Law, a law firm rather than an insurance agency, and the principal takes reference calls. We would rather tell you that than imply a property and casualty reference we do not have. Five channel specific voice agents route and handle intake there, and across our practice the total is more than 6,000 AI handled calls. The LELF platform is the fullest example of what commissioning looks like at operational scale: a 47-attorney litigation firm runs its matter, invoice and trust accounting operation on it, holding 13,296 matters, 4,396 clients and 5,684 invoices, with trust reconciled byte identical against the system it replaced. That firm is under confidentiality and stays anonymised, which is why we name the platform and not the firm. Across the practice we have delivered more than forty commissions.

What that evidence supports is a specific claim: we build systems that carry real operational volume in a regulated professional services business and reconcile to the penny under audit, which is the same shape of problem as agency accounting and commission reconciliation. What it does not support is a claim that we have decommissioned a Sagitta tenant for anyone, because we have not, and the migration section below says that in plain language rather than around it.

Seven situations where every argument in the previous section fails, and where we would tell you to stay put on a call. None of the published alternatives lists has a section like this, which is itself worth noticing.

Agencies whose real dependency is carrier connectivity. If your book is placed across a wide carrier panel and your downloads are configured and working, that is the single hardest thing on this page to replace, and no build we do touches it. A reported 150 or more carrier connections is not a feature you re-buy, it is years of configuration and relationship. If that is what Sagitta is doing for you, keep it, and evaluate a build only as a layer on top.

Agencies with deep wholesale or complex commercial business. Surplus lines compliance, layered programmes, complex commission structures and the accounting behind them are where light platforms stop working quietly rather than loudly. Sagitta's depth here is the reason large wholesale operations stay on it. Downgrading to a personal lines oriented platform to save money is not a saving, it is a scope reduction you will discover during a renewal cycle.

Agencies where the manual work costs less than the maintenance line. This is the arithmetic test and it is the one we apply on calls. The annual step on the build line in the chart above is $58,563 at the midpoint of our fee band. If the renewal prep, rekeying, document chasing and commission reconciliation across your whole agency costs less than that in real staff hours, then the build does not return its cost and we will say so. Measure it before anyone quotes you anything.

Agencies that need a working answer next quarter. A commissioned build ships a prototype in seven to ten days and production in five to seven weeks, which is fast for a build and slow for a fire. If the deadline is real and near, buying something is faster than building something, and it is not close.

Agencies with a genuinely good contract. If your renewal quote is near the bottom of the reported range and your terms are locked, you have leverage most agencies do not. Take the total cost figure from this page into the renewal conversation and defend the contract you have rather than paying a six figure migration toll to find out what the market rate is.

Agencies where nobody will own the system internally. An owned build needs a named person who cares about it, even at a light touch. Agencies without that person are better off renting, because the alternative is an orphaned system that decays quietly and then embarrasses everyone.

Agencies that cannot name the workflow. If the pain is real but nobody can point at the specific process that leaks hours, no vendor on this page can help you and neither can we. Two weeks of observation costs nothing and it is the highest return work available to you right now.

1. Do you have your current Sagitta order form and renewal quote in front of you? If no, stop here and go find them. Every reported figure on this page is a substitute for that document and a worse one, and no decision after this point is sound without it. If yes, continue.

2. Has anyone told you Sagitta is being sunset or discontinued? If yes, stop and ask them for the notice. We checked Vertafore's own product page on August 27, 2026 and found an actively sold product with no end of life language on it. Urgency nobody can document is a sales technique, not a deadline. Once that is settled, continue.

3. Is the platform you are considering built for an agency your size? If you are looking at EZLynx, HawkSoft, NowCerts or AgencyZoom and your agency has not genuinely shrunk, stop. Price the carrier list first: write down every carrier you place business with and make each candidate confirm connectivity in writing. If the answer is a subset, the saving is not a saving. If you are looking at AMS360, QQCatalyst or Nexsure to get away from Vertafore, stop as well, because those are Vertafore products. If your candidate is Applied Epic, continue.

4. Is your complaint about the system of record itself, or about the work around it? If it is the record, meaning policy structure, accounting, carrier connectivity or regulatory depth, then Applied Epic is the only comparable option and the next step is a migration scoping conversation with them. Stop here and go do that properly. If it is the work around it, continue.

5. Can you name that work in one sentence with an hours figure attached? If no, stop, and spend two weeks measuring across renewal prep, submission assembly and commission reconciliation. Every failed build we have seen started with an unnamed constraint. If yes, continue.

6. Run your numbers in the calculator above. Does the manual work cost more per year than the build maintenance line? If no, stop. The build does not return its cost at your volume, staying put is the cheapest row on the table, and we would rather you keep your money. If yes, continue.

7. Is the budget runway for a $45,000 to $180,000 fixed fee real this quarter, and will a principal spend 45 minutes on the diagnosis? If no, park it and revisit at renewal, with the total cost figure from this page as your leverage in the meantime. If yes, that call is the next step, and a meaningful share of these calls end with us telling an agency to stay where it is.

Almost nobody writing about switching answers this question with specifics, which is strange, because it is the question that decides whether an agency ever acts on any of the rest. Here is the honest shape. The one published dollar figure, $150,000 to $500,000 over nine to eighteen months at wholesale complexity, is REPORTED from a single third party blog with no corroboration we could find, so treat it as an order of magnitude. The phases below are our own scoping shape for an engagement of this type, stated as estimates rather than dressed up as research.

You are not moving policies. You are moving six things. The policy records themselves are the easy part and the part every migration pitch talks about. The other five are where projects overrun. Transaction and endorsement history, which is what an errors and omissions claim will be reconstructed from years later. Accounting and commission records, including receivables in flight and statements only partly reconciled. Documents and attachments, with their links to the right policy term rather than to a folder. Activity, suspense and service trails, which encode how your agency actually works. And carrier download connections, which are not data at all: they are re established with each carrier, one at a time, and the calendar for that belongs to the carriers rather than to you.

Phase one: inventory and reconciliation design. Before anything moves, someone answers what is actually in there and what of it matters. The deliverable that matters at the end of this phase is a reconciliation standard: policies out equals policies in, balances out equals balances in, matched by line, with the exceptions listed rather than rounded away. An agency that starts a migration without agreeing what reconciled means has already lost the argument it will be having in month nine.

Phase two: parallel run through a full renewal cycle. Both systems live. New business and endorsements go into the new system, the old one goes read only, and nothing is switched off. Run it for at least one complete renewal cycle, because the gaps in a policy history do not surface when you go looking for them, they surface when a certificate holder calls on a Thursday afternoon about a term that ended two years ago. An agency that skips the parallel run to save a quarter usually spends the saving twice.

Phase three: decommission. Only after the parallel run has produced no unresolved exceptions, and only after someone has read the notice provisions in your order form. A management system contract that auto renews will renew in the middle of your migration if nobody sends the letter, and that is a five figure mistake made entirely on the calendar.

A realistic total is nine to eighteen months from decision to switching the old system off, which agrees with the one published figure we have. The largest driver of that number is not the size of your book, it is how many carrier connections have to be re established and how much of your accounting history you genuinely need to carry across rather than archive.

What we do and do not do here. We have not run a Sagitta decommissioning, and we are not going to imply otherwise. What we build is the automation layer that sits on top of whichever management system you land on, which is a different job and one we have evidence for. If your project needs a migration partner, that is a specialist engagement, and the platform you are moving to will usually name two or three.

The option most agencies do not consider. You do not have to leave to fix the problem. In a large share of the cases we see, the management system is doing its job, the licence is defensible, and the leak is in the work stacked around it. That path keeps Sagitta, keeps the carrier connections, keeps the accounting history, and builds the missing piece against the platform's integration surface. No migration, no parallel run, no decommissioning letter, and no six figure toll paid before the first day of value.

If Applied Epic is the platform you are actually weighing, the Applied Epic alternatives page runs this same arithmetic from the other side of that decision, and Applied Epic versus EZLynx is the segment question in detail. For the Vertafore sibling most often confused with Sagitta, the AMS360 alternatives page covers that platform on its own terms. On the build side, the Applied Epic integration playbook, the AMS360 automation playbook, the EZLynx automation playbook and the HawkSoft automation playbook each document what can actually be built on top of those platforms and where each one hits a wall. The insurance automation guide maps the seven agency workflows that durably automate. If you are choosing an advisor rather than a platform, the best AI consultants for insurance agencies ranks the field on who publishes a price, who names a segment and who can put a client on the phone. And the insurance agency brief is the short version of how a commission works for an agency this size.