FNOL intake
High volume · fixed schema · latency-sensitive
Turn a first notice of loss into a structured claim record with the gaps flagged.
Claims volume shouldn’t set your AI bill.
Insurers process the same document, the same question and the same claim shape millions of times a year. Metered inference charges full price for every repetition.
The most repetitive work costs the most.
Claims intake and document extraction are the highest-volume, lowest-variance workloads in the business. They are exactly the workloads metered pricing punishes hardest.
- Claim surges after weather events arrive as cost spikes
- Policyholder medical and financial data transits third-party infrastructure
- Per-token pricing makes straight-through processing less attractive the better it works
- Quality bars are regulatory, not aspirational
Both halves of the bill.
ai.yourcompany.com
Underwriting and claims teams are heavy users of general-purpose AI tools, bought seat by seat. That spend usually sits in a different budget from the API bill, which is exactly why nobody has added the two together.
- Underwriters
- Claims handlers
- Actuarial
- Broker support
- Marketing and comms
api.ai.yourcompany.com
The metered inference behind the product itself, the workloads below. This is the half that grows with adoption, and the half that repetition makes cheapest to move.
Runvo replaces both, and you get one smaller AI bill.
The workloads that move well.
High-volume and repetitive is the test. These are the shapes that usually clear it in insurance.
Claim document extraction
Very high volume · batch · repetitive
Invoices, reports, estimates and correspondence into fields a system can act on.
Policy & coverage Q&A
Interactive · retrieval-heavy
Answer coverage questions grounded in the policyholder’s actual wording.
Renewal & cross-sell drafting
Batch · scheduled · non-interactive
Personalised renewal narratives from existing coverage and claims history.
Fraud signal triage
Moderate volume · reviewed
Surface and summarise the inconsistencies a human investigator should look at first.
The same workload, priced twice.
Where inference runs
Third-party API region
Your cloud account or on-prem
Policyholder data
Leaves the perimeter
Never leaves it
Cost at claim surge
Scales with the event
Absorbed by provisioned headroom
Cost shape
Per token, uncapped
Provisioned capacity, fixed
Straight-through processing
Each pass billed
Marginal cost near zero
Model version control
Provider’s schedule
Yours, pinned
Illustrative. Which of these hold for you depends on your volumes, quality bar and latency targets. That is what the assessment establishes.
Fixed
Cost of running it
One monthly figure, sized to the workload.
Flat
Cost through a claim surge
Capacity is sized with headroom.
0
Policyholder records exported
Inference runs inside your boundary.
What we treat as non-negotiable.
Quality is a constraint
Extraction accuracy and answer quality are agreed up front and measured against the workload being replaced. A workload that cannot hold the bar does not move.
Special category data
Medical and financial detail stays inside your perimeter, under the retention policy you already run.
Reversibility
Your application keeps talking to a standard interface, so any workload can move back to an external provider.
Tell us what you run in insurance.
We start from your real traffic (volumes, prompt shapes, quality bars and latency targets) and tell you which workloads are worth moving. If none of them are, we say so.
Talk to Runvo
Tell us the size of the firm and what your client contracts require.