Insurance Use Case

Underwriting Intelligence
for Cyber Risk

How insurers, brokers, MGAs, reinsurers, and captive structures use Risk Aperture to move beyond static actuarial models, quantify cyber exposure, and make portfolio decisions with confidence.

~1 wk
To first board-ready output for an insured
31
Compliance frameworks in PRISM
2,623
Requirements mapped & cross-referenced
10 yrs
Proprietary field data behind the platform
Cyber Poverty Line®

The Cyber Poverty Line® is the minimum viable security investment threshold for a specific organization's size, sector, complexity, and regulatory environment. It is not a generic industry benchmark — it is calculated from the insured's own assessment data using ten years of proprietary field intelligence.

For underwriters, it answers the question that questionnaire scores cannot: is this insured's security investment structurally sufficient, or are they operating below the threshold where claims become disproportionately frequent and severe?

PostureUnderwriting ImplicationLikely Carrier Response
Below the Cyber Poverty Line® Governance, controls, staffing, or budget are materially insufficient. Claims from this segment are disproportionately severe with longer recovery timelines. Higher premiums, restrictive exclusions, mandatory remediation requirements, shorter policy terms, or declination.
At or near the Line The insured is at threshold but fragile. A single staffing change or third-party event can push them below it. Monitoring velocity matters as much as current posture. Standard terms with active monitoring requirements. PRISM's drift detection gives early warning before posture degrades between renewals.
In the Goldilocks Zone Investment is appropriately matched to risk profile. Controls are architecturally sound, governance is mature, and recovery assumptions are defensible. Best terms, broadest coverage, lowest premiums. Risk Aperture provides the evidence trail that justifies favorable treatment to reinsurers and regulators.
Above the Goldilocks Zone Rare, but informative: suggests a control monoculture or organizational risk that technology is compensating for. Review Big 6 dimensions before broadening coverage further. PRISM's tool rationalization analysis may reveal consolidation opportunities that reduce cost without increasing exposure.

Generic risk scores apply industry-wide benchmarks uniformly — they tell you how an insured compares to others but not whether their investment is structurally appropriate for their specific profile. A healthcare organization with 500 employees and significant PHI exposure has fundamentally different minimum viable investment requirements than a professional services firm of the same size.

The Cyber Poverty Line® is calculated from the insured's own Foundations assessment data — their revenue, sector, regulatory environment, third-party exposure, staffing capacity, and organizational risk dimensions — using ten years of proprietary field intelligence. The result is a threshold specific to that organization, not a percentile rank relative to peers.

For underwriters, this distinction matters: an insured can score in the top quartile of their peer group and still be below their own Cyber Poverty Line®. Peer ranking and structural sufficiency are different questions.