COMPARISON TOOL SYSTEM AND METHOD

An original risk relationship data store may contain records representing potential risk relationships (and each record may include an identifier and original risk attribute values). An adjusted risk relationship data store may contain records representing the plurality of potential risk relationships and at least some risk attribute values may have been adjusted from the original risk attribute value. A computer server may receive, from a remote user device, a selected potential risk relationship and retrieve the appropriate records from the original and adjusted risk relationship data stores. The server may then execute a comparison tool to automatically identify risk attribute values from the adjusted risk relationship data store that differ from the original risk attribute values and flag those values to the remote user device. After receiving information to explain each difference, a summary of the automatically identified risk attribute values, including the information to explain each difference, may be transmitted.

BACKGROUND

An entity may enter into a risk relationship with an enterprise. For example, a small business might purchase an insurance policy (e.g., a property insurance policy, a workers' compensation insurance policy, etc.) from an insurance company. When a potential insured (e.g., a potential customer or client) initially seeks insurance from an insurance company, the insurance company generally requests various information from the potential insured to determine appropriate policy details (e.g., coverage amounts, deductibles, premiums, etc.). This original information might be supplied, for example, by having the business fill out an insurance application via an insurance agent, broker, online process, etc. The insurer may then review the information (e.g., including verifying, evaluating, and/or making adjustments to the supplied information during an underwriting process), and an appropriate insurance quote is eventually prepared that can be purchased by the potential insured.

Note that some of the original information supplied by the potential insured may be adjusted during the underwriting process. For example, an agent might have mistakenly thought that a particular business qualified for a safe practices discount, but that discount might not be included when the final insurance quote is provided. Similarly, a number of employees at a particular location might have been incorrect, an improper industry code may have been supplied, etc. Manually comparing the originally submitted information with the adjusted values to correctly identify and explain the changes to a potential insured can be a time consuming and error-prone task for an insurance agent or broker (e.g., especially when there are a substantial number of insurance attributes and/or adjustments that need to be investigated or reconciled).

It would be therefore desirable to provide systems and methods for an automated comparison tool platform that allow faster, more accurate results as compared to traditional approaches.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

According to some embodiments, systems, methods, apparatus, computer program code and means are provided for an automated comparison tool platform that permits faster, more accurate results as compared to traditional approaches and that allows for flexibility and effectiveness when acting on those results. In some embodiments, an original risk relationship data store may contain records representing potential risk relationships (and each record may include an identifier and original risk attribute values). An adjusted risk relationship data store may contain records representing the plurality of potential risk relationships and at least some risk attribute values may have been adjusted from the original risk attribute value. A computer server may receive, from a remote user device, a selected potential risk relationship and retrieve the appropriate records from the original and adjusted risk relationship data stores. The server may then execute a comparison tool to automatically identify risk attribute values from the adjusted risk relationship data store that differ from the original risk attribute values and flag those values to the remote user device. After receiving information to explain each difference, a summary of the automatically identified risk attribute values, including the information to explain each difference, may be transmitted.

Some embodiments comprise: means for receiving, from a remote user device, an indication of a selected potential risk relationship between an enterprise and an entity; means for retrieving, by the back-end application computer server from an original risk relationship data store, an electronic record associated with the selected potential risk relationship, including the original risk attribute values, wherein the original risk relationship data store contains electronic records that represent a plurality of potential risk relationships between the enterprise and at least one entity and each electronic record includes an electronic record identifier and original risk attribute values; means for retrieving, from an adjusted risk relationship data store, the electronic record associated with the selected potential risk relationship, wherein the adjusted risk relationship data store contains electronic records that represent the plurality of potential risk relationships and each electronic record includes an electronic record identifier and at least some risk attribute values have been adjusted from the original risk attribute value; means for executing a comparison tool to automatically identify risk attribute values from the adjusted risk relationship data store that differ from the original risk attribute values for the selected potential risk relationship; means for flagging the automatically identified risk attribute values to the remote user device; means for receiving, from the remote user device, information to explain each difference associated with the automatically identified risk attribute values; and means for transmitting a summary of the automatically identified risk attribute values, including the information to explain each difference.

In some embodiments, a communication device associated with a back-end application computer server exchanges information with remote devices in connection with an interactive graphical user interface. The information may be exchanged, for example, via public and/or proprietary communication networks.

A technical effect of some embodiments of the invention is an improved and computerized way to provide an automated comparison tool platform in a way that provides faster, more accurate results as compared to traditional approaches. With these and other advantages and features that will become hereinafter apparent, a more complete understanding of the nature of the invention can be obtained by referring to the following detailed description and to the drawings appended hereto.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention provides significant technical improvements to facilitate electronic messaging and dynamic data processing. The present invention is directed to more than merely a computer implementation of a routine or conventional activity previously known in the industry as it significantly advances the technical efficiency, access, and/or accuracy of communications between devices by implementing a specific new method and system as defined herein. The present invention is a specific advancement in the area of electronic risk analysis and/or resource allocation by providing benefits in data accuracy, data availability, and data integrity and such advances are not merely a longstanding commercial practice. The present invention provides improvement beyond a mere generic computer implementation as it involves the processing and conversion of significant amounts of data in a new beneficial manner as well as the interaction of a variety of specialized client and/or third-party systems, networks, and subsystems. For example, in the present invention information may be processed, updated, and analyzed via a back-end-end application server to accurately compare risk relationship information, the allocation of resources, and/or the exchange of information, thus improving the overall efficiency of the computer system associated with message storage requirements and/or bandwidth considerations (e.g., by reducing the number of messages that need to be transmitted via a communication network). Moreover, embodiments associated with collecting accurate information might further improve risk values, predictions of risk values, allocations of resources, electronic record routing and signal generation, the automatic establishment of communication links, etc.

For example,FIG. 1is a high-level block diagram of a system100according to some embodiments of the present invention. In particular, the system100includes a back-end application computer150server that may access information in an original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112(e.g., storing a set of electronic records that represent originally submitted risk relationship data and/or adjusted risk relationship data, each record including, for example, one or more risk relationship identifiers, risk attributes, adjustment explanations, communication addresses, etc.). The back-end application computer server150may also retrieve information from internal data sources120(e.g., internal to an insurance company or an employer system) and/or external data sources130(e.g., third-party data) in connection with an automated comparison tool platform155. According to some embodiments, the system100further applies machine learning, artificial intelligence algorithms, business logic, and/or other models to the electronic records. The back-end application computer server150may also exchange information with a remote user device160associated with a potential insured, insurance agent, broker, operator, administrator, etc. (e.g., via communication port165that might include a firewall). According to some embodiments, an interactive graphical user interface platform of the back-end application computer server150(and, in some cases, third-party data) may facilitate the display of information associated with the automated comparison tool platform155via one or more remote computers (e.g., to enable a manual review of automatically generated communications) and/or the remote user device160. For example, the remote user device160may receive updated information (e.g., a summary report and/or insurance quote) from the back-end application computer server150. Based on the updated information, a user may review the data from the original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112and take informed actions in response to communications. Note that the back-end application computer server150and/or any of the other devices and methods described herein might be associated with a cloud-based environment and/or a vendor that performs a service for an enterprise.

The back-end application computer server150and/or the other elements of the system100might be, for example, associated with a Personal Computer (“PC”), laptop computer, smartphone, an enterprise server, a server farm, and/or a database or similar storage devices. According to some embodiments, an “automated” back-end application computer server150(and/or other elements of the system100) may facilitate communications with remote user devices160and/or updates of electronic records in the original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112. As used herein, the term “automated” may refer to, for example, actions that can be performed with little (or no) intervention by a human.

The back-end application computer server150may store information into and/or retrieve information from the original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112. The original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112might, for example, store electronic records representing a plurality of risk relationships and/or potential risk relationships, each electronic record having a risk relationship identifier, risk attributes, communication addresses, etc. The original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112may also contain information about prior and current interactions with entities, including those associated with the remote user devices160(e.g., user preference values associated with data formats, protocols, etc.). The original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112may be locally stored or reside remote from the back-end application computer server150. As will be described further below, the original risk relationship data store110and adjusted risk relationship data store112may be used by the back-end application computer server150in connection with an interactive user interface to provide information about the automated comparison tool platform155. Although a single back-end application computer server150is shown inFIG. 1, any number of such devices may be included. Moreover, various devices described herein might be combined according to embodiments of the present invention. For example, in some embodiments, the back-end application computer server150, the original risk relationship data store110, and the adjusted risk relationship data store112might be co-located and/or may comprise a single apparatus.

In this way, the system100may provide an ability to compare a new business submission (e.g., an insurance quote) to an initial rating and point out any differences that will need to be explained to a potential insured (and thus facilitate a “what is different” talk with insurance agents and brokers).

Note that the system100ofFIG. 1is provided only as an example, and embodiments may be associated with additional elements or components.FIG. 2illustrates a method200that might be performed by some or all of the elements of the system100described with respect toFIG. 1, or any other system, according to some embodiments of the present invention. The flow charts described herein do not imply a fixed order to the steps, and embodiments of the present invention may be practiced in any order that is practicable. Note that any of the methods described herein may be performed by hardware, software, or any combination of these approaches. For example, a computer-readable storage medium may store thereon instructions that when executed by a machine result in performance according to any of the embodiments described herein.

At S210, a back-end application computer server (e.g., associated with an enterprise) may receive, from a remote user device, an indication of a selected potential risk relationship between an enterprise and an entity (e.g., between an insurance company and a potential insured). The remote user device might be associated with, for example, an insurance agent or broker.

At S220, the back-end application computer server may retrieve, from an original risk relationship data store, an electronic record associated with the selected potential risk relationship, including original risk attribute values. The original risk relationship data store may contain, according to some embodiments, electronic records that represent a plurality of potential risk relationships between the enterprise and at least one entity and each electronic record includes an electronic record identifier and original risk attribute values.

At S230, the system may retrieve, from an adjusted risk relationship data store, an electronic record associated with the selected potential risk relationship. The adjusted risk relationship data store may contain, according to some embodiments, electronic records that represent the plurality of potential risk relationships. Note that each electronic record may include an electronic record identifier and at least some risk attribute values may have been adjusted from the original risk attribute value (e.g., during an insurance underwriting process).

At S240, a comparison tool may be executed to automatically identify risk attribute values from the adjusted risk relationship data store that differ from the original risk attribute values for the selected potential risk relationship (e.g., by more than a pre-determined threshold value or percentage). According to some embodiments, the comparison tool further executes based on internal data of the enterprise and external data.

At S250, the automatically identified risk attribute values may be flagged to the remote user device. At S260, the system may receive, from the remote user device, information to explain each difference associated with the automatically identified risk attribute values. The information might include, for example, text data, documentation (e.g., spreadsheets, document images, etc.), photographs, video links, audio files, etc. According to some embodiments, the information to explain a difference associated with a plurality of automatically identified risk attribute values may be received as a bulk explanation as described with respect toFIG. 8. Note that the receipt of information to explain a difference may be received from the remote user device via selection from a list of possible explanations. The list of possible explanations may represent, for example, a list of previously received explanations.

At S270, a summary of the automatically identified risk attribute values, including the information to explain each difference, may be transmitted (e.g. to the remote user device). According to some embodiments, the selected potential risk relationship is associated with a communication address and the transmission of the summary at S270is automatically sent to the communication address. The communication address might be associated with, for example, a postal address, an email address, a telephone number, a text message, a chat interface, a video communication link, etc. In some embodiments, the summary that is transmitted at S270further includes assumable information received from the remote user device and/or a request for missing information (e.g., the underwriter might ask for clarification about certain details associated with a small business insurance policy).

According to some embodiments, the selected potential risk relationship is a potential insurance policy between an insurer and an insured. The potential insurance policy might be associated with, for example, a general liability insurance policy, a property insurance policy, a workers' compensation insurance policy, business insurance, etc. In this case, the remote user device may be associated with an insurance agent or broker, and the original risk relationship data store is associated with original submissions from the insurance agent or broker. Moreover, the adjusted risk relationship data store may be associated with a quote proposal from an insurance underwriter. In such situations, the summary might include an insured identifier, an insurer identifier, a report creation date, an agency or broker identifier, an insurance policy number, a Line Of Business (“LOB”), an insurance policy period, etc. The summary may further include a policy element, an original policy value, a quoted policy value, a justification rational, assumed values, etc.

FIG. 3is a comparison tool Graphical User Interface (“GUI”) display300in accordance with some embodiments. The display300might provide an overall interface310of a comparison tool for insurance agents system. The interface310might include, for example, an account name, manually entered assumables320, and a “Collapse All” icon330that might collapse (or expand) information about multiple policies. According to some embodiments, selection of an element (e.g., via touch screen or a computer mouse pointer340) might result in a pop-up window providing additional information about that element (e.g., linking to data sources, algorithm parameters, etc.). Moreover, selection of an “Check All” icon350may select multiple insurance policies. Similarly, a user might have the ability to “Create Document”360, “Justify Selected”370(as explained in connection withFIG. 8), and/or to “Save”380the currently entered information. The display300also includes details390about insurance policies, such as an attribute description, an original value, a new or adjusted value, an explanation or justification for the change, etc. Note that if the “original” value is identical to the “new” value, the attribute would not be included on the display300(because there was no adjustment to that value). According to some embodiments, the display300, along with other displays described herein, may give an operator, administrator, insurance agent, or broker a high-level, holistic view that aggregates data from various disparate sources in connection with insurance quotes. Such a view may help an enterprise configure and execute the computer system in a more efficient and accurate manner. Some embodiments might utilize ANGULAR® User Interface (“UI”) framework to help generate HTML and JavaScript data for common UI components and support overall look-and-feel guidelines with relatively little extra effort.

The display300may let a user provide an explanation or justification for any adjustments that have been automatically detected. For example,FIG. 4Ais a comparison tool display400using a list of possible explanations410according to some embodiments. According to some embodiments, the list410includes explanations that have been supplied by the user (or by other users) in the last for similar types of attributes. According to some embodiments, the list of explanations or “justifications” may depend on a type of risk relationship between an enterprise and an entity. For example,FIG. 4Billustrates different sets of justifications450that are available depending on a particular line of business that is associated with an insurance policy. In this example, different sets of justifications450are available for workers' compensation (“WC”), property (“Prop”), general liability (“GL”), and automotive (“Auto”) insurance policies.

FIG. 5is a quote selection display500in accordance with some embodiments. The display500includes information about multiple insurance policy quotes510, such an underwriter name, account manager name, LOB, effective date, status (e.g., open or rated), segment, and/or a description of a particular quote. Selection of a “Quote Quality Compare” icon520may launch a stand-alone internal application that will automatically compare a new business submission with an initial rating.

FIG. 6is a comparison tool for agents display600according to some embodiments. The display600includes details610for various insurance policies being compared, including attributes (e.g., underwriting companies, basic broad form, drug free workplace, etc.), original values, new or adjusted values, and justifications. A “Collapse All” icon630may be used to expand (or collapse) those policies. Note that each attribute includes a user-selectable check box that can be used to designate that attribute (e.g., the “basic broad form” has been selected by the user in the example ofFIG. 6), and a “Check All” icon650may be used to selected multiple attributes (e.g., to create a bulk explanation or justification as described with respect toFIG. 8). The display600further includes information690about other selections that might be expanded or collapsed (e.g., based on address, classification, etc.).

FIG. 7is an account display700in accordance with some embodiments. As illustrated inFIG. 7, the account display700may include an account name and a list of potential insurance policies710that may be compared (including, for each potential insurance policy, a policy number, LOB, quote sequence, and effective date). Note that some policies might be excluded from comparison when a base version is not available for comparison. The user may “check off” some or all of the policies and then select a “Compare” icon to initiate the automatic process.

FIG. 8is a quote comparison display800using a bulk justification or explanation according to some embodiments. Here, the user has “checked off” three attributes: other states, Workers' Compensation (“WC”) states included, and WC states excluded. A bulk justification pop-up window810appears and the user can enter a single justification820(e.g., by entering text) that will be applied to all three attributes. Such an approach may save the user time (because he or she does not need to select the same explanation or justification separately for each of the three attributes). Selection of a “Close” icon830may remove the pop-up window810, and selection of an “Apply” icon840may result in the justification820being applied to the selected attributes.

FIG. 9is an output display900in accordance with some embodiments. In particular, the display900lets a user define where the comparison result910documentation will be stored (e.g., in “OUTPUT_REPORT.PDF” in the example ofFIG. 9). Selection of a “Save” icon980may result in the information from the display being saved980for later access.

FIG. 10is a more detailed high-level block diagram of a system1000in accordance with some embodiments. As before, the system1000includes a back-end application computer server1050that may access information in an insurance policy data store1010. The back-end application computer server1050may also retrieve information from an employer system1020(e.g., a human resources spreadsheet listing employees and office addresses), an insurance system1030, and/or government record data1040in connection with an automated comparison tool platform1055. According to some embodiments, the government record data1040might be associated with a governmental insurance program (e.g., a list of “healthcare for all” enrollees). Note that various data elements from the insurance policy data store1010, employer system1020, insurance system1030, and/or government record data1040might be combined, merged, verified, etc. The back-end application computer server1050may also exchange information via communication links to transmit output reports1060(e.g., via a communication port1065that might include a firewall) to communicate with agents and brokers. The back-end application computer server1050might also transmit information directly to an email server (e.g., to send insurance quote materials), a workflow application, and/or a calendar application1070(e.g., to schedule a telephone call to discuss changes made to an initial set of values) to facilitate automated communications and/or other system actions.

The back-end application computer server1050may store information into and/or retrieve information from the insurance policy data store1010. The insurance policy data store1010might, for example, store electronic records1012representing a plurality of insurance policies, each electronic record including an insurance policy identifier1014, a set of attributes1016, a communication address1018, etc. According to some embodiments, the system1000may also provide a dashboard view of insurance quotes and/or supporting material (e.g., including acceptance rates, financial results, etc.).

According to some embodiments, the system may use a Representational State Transfer (“REST”) web service, such as a Spring Boot framework, to spin up a basic structure of the back-end application computer server1055. This may simplify the amount of detailed configuration that is required by leveraging the substantial set of Java annotations that Spring provides. The simplified configuration steps may also reduce the complexity of resulting code for maintenance (as well as extension). A Spring framework may shorten the time it takes to configure a new service from hours/days to minutes (fostering incremental evolutions of a new system).

FIGS. 11 and 12illustrate a summary report according to some embodiments (e.g., a report that summarizes the changes, differences, and/or adjustments that have been made). In particular,FIG. 11shows page one 1100 of a summary of changes report that includes the primary insured, agency name, policy number(s), LOB, and policy period(s) of the policies that were compared by the tool.FIG. 12shows page two 1200 of the summary of changes report that includes the policy number, LOB, policy period, particular policy elements, policy values, quoted values, explanations or justifications for those changes, assumable information, etc. Note that additional pages might be included in the summary report if additional insurance polices had been compared by the tool. Moreover, the summary of changes might be grouped in accordance with an insurance policy type or line of business. For example, a general liability policy might include general elements, elements grouped by various buildings, and, for each building, elements grouped by classification. Similarly, an automotive policy might be grouped by vehicles, ZIP code, etc. while a property policy might be grouped by location.

The embodiments described herein may be implemented using any number of different hardware configurations. For example,FIG. 13illustrates an apparatus1300that may be, for example, associated with the systems100,1000described with respect toFIGS. 1 and 10, respectively. The apparatus1300comprises a processor1310, such as one or more commercially available Central Processing Units (“CPUs”) in the form of one-chip microprocessors, coupled to a communication device1320configured to communicate via communication network (not shown inFIG. 13). The communication device1320may be used to communicate, for example, with one or more remote administrator computers and or communication devices (e.g., PCs and smartphones). Note that communications exchanged via the communication device1320may utilize security features, such as those between a public internet user and an internal network of the insurance enterprise. The security features might be associated with, for example, web servers, firewalls, and/or PCI infrastructure. The apparatus1300further includes an input device1340(e.g., a mouse and/or keyboard to enter information about comparison thresholds, rules and logic, etc.) and an output device1350(e.g., to output reports regarding insurance quotes and comparison summaries).

The processor1310also communicates with a storage device1330. The storage device1330may comprise any appropriate information storage device, including combinations of magnetic storage devices (e.g., a hard disk drive), optical storage devices, mobile telephones, and/or semiconductor memory devices. The storage device1330stores a program1315and/or a resource allocation tool or application for controlling the processor1310. The processor1310performs instructions of the program1315, and thereby operates in accordance with any of the embodiments described herein. For example, the processor1310might access an original risk relationship data store that contains records representing potential risk relationships (and each record may include an identifier and original risk attribute values). An adjusted risk relationship data store may contain records representing the plurality of potential risk relationships and at least some risk attribute values may have been adjusted from the original risk attribute value. The processor1310may receive, from a remote user device, a selected potential risk relationship and retrieve the appropriate records from the original and adjusted risk relationship data stores. The processor1310may then execute a comparison tool to automatically identify risk attribute values from the adjusted risk relationship data store that differ from the original risk attribute values and flag those values to the remote user device. After receiving information to explain each difference, a summary of the automatically identified risk attribute values, including the information to explain each difference, may be transmitted by the processor1310.

The program1315may be stored in a compressed, uncompiled and/or encrypted format. The program1315may furthermore include other program elements, such as an operating system, a database management system, and/or device drivers used by the processor1310to interface with peripheral devices.

As used herein, information may be “received” by or “transmitted” to, for example: (i) the back-end application computer server1300from another device; or (ii) a software application or module within the back-end application computer server1300from another software application, module, or any other source.

In some embodiments (such as shown inFIG. 13), the storage device1330further stores a potential risk relationship database1400(e.g., containing insurance policy information), an underwriting database1360, an employer database1370, and a governmental information database1380. An example of a database that might be used in connection with the apparatus1300will now be described in detail with respect toFIG. 14. Note that the database described herein is only an example, and additional and/or different information may be stored therein. Moreover, various databases might be split or combined in accordance with any of the embodiments described herein. For example, the potential risk relationship database1400and the underwriting database1360might be combined and/or linked to each other within the program1315.

Referring toFIG. 14, a table is shown that represents the potential risk relationship database1400that may be stored at the apparatus1300according to some embodiments. The table may include, for example, entries associated with potential insurance sales opportunities. The table may also define fields1402,1404,1406,1408,1410for each of the entries. The fields1402,1404,1406,1408,1410may, according to some embodiments, specify: a potential insurance policy identifier1402, a LOB1404, a communication address1406, an effective date1408, and a comparison output1410. The potential risk relationship database1400may be created and updated, for example, based on information electrically received from various operators, administrators, and computer systems (e.g., including those of an insurance underwriter, agent, or broker) that may be associated with an insurer.

The potential insurance policy identifier1402may be, for example, a unique alphanumeric code identifying an insurance policy sales opportunity. The LOB1404might describe the type of insurance (e.g., general liability, property, workers' compensation, etc.). The communication address1406might be postal address, telephone number, communication link, etc. that can be used to transmit information about the results of an automated comparison process. The effective date1408might describe when the insurance policy would begin. The comparison output1410might indicate a file, link, document, etc. that contains the result of the automated comparison process.

Thus, embodiments may provide an automated and efficient way for a comparison tool platform to allow for faster, more accurate results as compared to traditional approaches. Embodiments may improve the experience of an insurance agent or broker (who can avoid wasting time and the need to come back with questions). Similarly, embodiments may save time for account managers (who do not need to revisit reconciliation issues).

Although specific hardware and data configurations have been described herein, note that any number of other configurations may be provided in accordance with embodiments of the present invention (e.g., some of the information associated with the displays described herein might be implemented as a virtual or augmented reality display and/or the databases described herein may be combined or stored in external systems). Moreover, although embodiments have been described with respect to particular types of insurance policies, any of the embodiments may instead be associated with other types of insurance policies in addition to and/or instead of the policies described herein (e.g., professional liability insurance policies, extreme weather insurance policies, new business, policy renewals, issued policies, etc.). Similarly, although certain attributes (e.g., insurance policy values) were described in connection some embodiments herein, other types of attributes might be used instead.

Further, the displays and devices illustrated herein are only provided as examples, and embodiments may be associated with any other types of user interfaces. For example,FIG. 15illustrates a handheld tablet computer1500showing an automated comparison tool platform display1510according to some embodiments. The comparison tool platform display1510might include user-selectable data that can be highlighted and/or modified by a user of the handheld computer1510to provide information about potential risk relationship comparisons. Moreover, selection of a “Save” icon1520may store the values to be used by any of the embodiments described herein.

Note that the displays described herein might be constantly updated based on new information (e.g., as data is received by the insurer). For example, the displays might be updated in substantially real time or on a periodic basis (e.g., once each night). According to some embodiments, an underwriter, agent, or broker might be able to select a particular time in the past and the displays may be updated to reflect the information as it previously existed at that particular time (e.g., what would a user have seen one year ago?).

FIG. 16illustrates an overall business process1600in accordance with some embodiments. At S1610, an insurer may receive information about a potential insurance policy, including original policy values. At S1620, an underwriter might adjust some of those values. At S1630, an automated comparison tool may be run (and appropriate explanations may be collected). At S1640, an insurance quote may then be provided along with the result of the comparison tool to explain any differences. The insurer may then issue the insurance policy in accordance with the adjusted insurance policy values at S1650. Note that at any point in the process1600, the automated comparison tool might be executed multiple times (as illustrated by the dashed arrow inFIG. 16). For example, an underwriter might run the tool, decide to make some additional updates, and then run the tool again. Similarly, an insurance agent or broker might view the results of a comparison, suggest some changes, and then request that a new comparison be performed. In any of these cases, information associated with a prior comparison may be “carried forward” in the tool for a subsequent comparison. For example, adjusted attribute values and/or associated justifications might be automatically carried forward and used in a new comparison (so that this information does not need to be repeatedly entered into the system). Similarly, information entered about one policy might be carried over to another policy (e.g., a business name, address, etc. entered for a workers' compensation comparison might be automatically carried over to a general liability comparison).