Product
AssistantKnowledge BaseAcademyAI ModelsConnectorsAdministrationTokens & QuotasTrust
HostingGDPRPrivacySustainabilityIndustries
All industriesLaw FirmsAccountants & CPAsManufacturingHealthcareReal EstateConstructionInsurance & FinanceRetailHospitality & TourismPublic SectorPricing
Pricing overviewCalculatorResources
VideosDownloadFAQBook a demoLanguage
Policy comparator
Upload both quotes and their general terms: emi lines up coverage limits, highlights every difference and lists the questions to clarify with your client. It never chooses on your behalf. Fictional example below.
Policy A · quote received
Lémanique Insurance (fictional insurer)
Annual premium
418 €
Simple theft away from home included
Source: Home_Quote_A.pdf, general terms Art. 4 to 12
Policy B · quote received
Helvalp Insurance (fictional insurer)
Annual premium
396 €
Excludes simple theft away from home (+38 €/yr)
Source: Home_Quote_B.pdf, general terms Art. 3 to 15
I compared both quotes. 5 coverage terms differ; the contents sum insured is identical.
| Criterion | Policy A | Policy B | Key takeaway |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual premium | 418 € | 396 € (434 € with theft add-on) | B is cheaper without the add-on, costlier with it |
| Deductible | 200 € | 500 € | 300 € difference per claim |
| Personal liability | 5 M€ | 10 M€ | Coverage limit doubled under B |
| Simple theft away from home | Included | Optional add-on | Depends on the client’s lifestyle |
| Glass breakage | Optional add-on | Included | Relevant given March’s glass claim |
| Policy term | 3 years, then annual | 1 year, auto-renewal | Longer lock-in period with A |
| Contents sum insured | 90,000 € | 90,000 € | Identical |
Clarify with the client
Do they regularly carry valuables (e-bike, laptop) away from home? Do they have large glazed windows or a ceramic cooktop? Are they comfortable locking in a three-year term?
What this summary is not
emi highlights factual differences — it recommends neither quote. Selecting the policy and advising the client remain strictly yours.
Fictional insurers, policy names and figures shown for illustration purposes.
Day-to-day workflows
“Compare these two commercial liability quotes for Rochat Joinery and list every coverage difference.”
Gap matrix“Prepare Thursday’s review with the Favres from our past meeting notes and recent email threads.”
Briefing sheet“Summarize all exclusions in these general terms in plain English, citing each article number.”
Cited summary“Draft a polite follow-up email requesting the remaining onboarding documents to open the account.”
Ready-to-review email“A client reported water damage. Draft the acknowledgment, list of required photos/invoices and next steps using our template.”
Standard claim reply“Align our internal client-onboarding SOP with the updated directive and highlight what changed.”
Updated SOPThe right model for every document
For a quick email chaser, Fast mode is plenty. When comparing intricate exclusion clauses across policies, select a deeper reasoning model. You stay in control, and your administrator governs approved models.
Confidentiality, traceability, compliance
I
Data hosted with an ISO 27001 certified Swiss provider and never used to train any model. Highly sensitive files can be stored with AI read access turned off.
II
One folder per client or advisor book in the Knowledge Base, with Manage, Contribute, Read or None permissions assigned per advisor.
III
Every answer cites the documents consulted, conversation logs stay auditable, and every user accepts your firm’s AI charter.
emi is designed to support your confidentiality and record-keeping duties. Exact regulatory requirements depend on your license and jurisdiction.
Division of responsibilities
Signed: the advisor
What emi never does
Bring two anonymized policy proposals: we’ll run emi’s comparison in 30 minutes and walk through what stays in your hands.