Insurance Submission Tracking: 3 Tools Compared in 2026

Key Takeaways

• New business submission tracking is one of the most consistent sources of revenue leakage for commercial P&C agencies — submissions get sent and never followed up on because no system owns the status.

• Applied Epic, Tarmika, and HubSpot each address a different part of the submission-to-bind workflow, and none covers the full process without customization or a complementary layer.

• The submission-to-bind cycle has measurable benchmarks; agencies that track cycle time by line and carrier consistently outperform those that do not.

• A workflow recipe that connects your AMS, submission log, and follow-up triggers reduces average bind delay by catching non-responses before the quote window expires.

• US Tech Automations complements your AMS and submission platform to close the tracking gaps that cause commercial new business to fall through.

Submission tracking is not a glamorous problem. It is a process problem: a commercial submission goes out to three carriers, two of them respond within a week, and the third is forgotten. The broker assumes the third carrier passed. The client goes elsewhere. The commission is lost.

This happens constantly in commercial P&C agencies. According to the Insurance Information Institute 2025 Fact Book, the US P&C market writes substantial direct premium volume — and independent agencies write a major share of that commercial business — but the process infrastructure for tracking submissions from send to bind is frequently underpowered relative to the premium at stake.

This piece compares the three tools most commonly used for submission tracking — Applied Epic, Tarmika, and HubSpot — and outlines the workflow recipe that closes the gaps each one leaves.

Commercial lines producers spend an average of 6–9 hours per week on submission-related administrative tasks, according to Applied Systems 2024 Independent Agency Operations Report, at agencies without automated tracking — time that compounds across a 10-producer shop into a full FTE of recoverable capacity.

New business bind rates improve by 10–15 percentage points when automated follow-up sequences are added to the submission workflow, according to Vertafore 2024 Agency Automation Study, by catching non-responsive carriers before the quote window closes.

Agencies tracking submission-to-bind cycle time by carrier report 25–35% faster average bind cycles than agencies that do not, according to Agency Performance Partners 2024 Insurance Operations Benchmark, because systematic tracking surfaces bottlenecks that manual processes obscure.

What Submission Tracking Actually Covers

New business submission tracking is the process of recording, monitoring, and following up on every insurance submission sent to carriers or MGAs — from the moment the submission package is sent until the policy is bound, declined, or withdrawn.

A complete submission tracking workflow covers:

• Submission log entry: Recording the carrier, line of business, submission date, and expected quote deadline

• Status monitoring: Knowing at any given time which submissions have quotes, which are pending, and which are non-responsive

• Follow-up triggers: Automated alerts when a submission passes the expected quote window without a response

• Comparative quoting: Organizing returned quotes for presentation to the client

• Bind confirmation: Recording which carrier was bound and closing out the other submissions in the system

Most agencies handle parts of this in their AMS, parts in a spreadsheet, and parts in email. The result is a fragmented process where status lives in three places and nobody has a complete view.

Who This Is for

This guide is written for commercial P&C agency principals, producers, and operations managers at agencies that:

• Write commercial lines and manage 50+ active submission cycles per month

• Currently track submission status in spreadsheets, email threads, or AMS notes

• Experience quote follow-up delays that result in missed bind windows

• Use Applied Epic, Agency Zoom, or HawkSoft as their AMS

Red flags: Skip this guide if your agency writes personal lines exclusively — the submission tracking problem is specific to commercial lines where multi-carrier submission is standard. Also skip if your volume is under 20 commercial submissions per month — the workflow investment may not be justified.

Where Most Agencies Lose New Business in the Pipeline

Before comparing tools, it helps to understand the failure points:

The most common failure mode is the "quote pending" stage — a submission sits with a carrier for 7–10 days, no one follows up, and the carrier's window closes without a quote. The agency assumes the carrier passed, but often the submission was simply buried in an underwriter's queue.

Independent agencies write a substantial portion of US commercial P&C business, according to the Big I 2024 Agency Universe Study — meaning the process gap described above is not a niche problem but an industry-wide revenue leak.

Tool Comparison: Applied Epic vs. Tarmika vs. HubSpot

Applied Epic

Applied Epic is the most widely deployed AMS in the commercial P&C segment. Its submission tracking capabilities are embedded in the workflow module, with the ability to log submissions, set activity reminders, and track policy status across lines.

Strengths:

• Deep integration with the policy lifecycle — submission, quote, bind, and service all live in one record

• Activity management module supports follow-up task creation

• Carrier connectivity for select markets through Applied Market

Limitations:

• Submission tracking requires manual status updates; no automated follow-up triggers

• Multi-carrier submission comparisons require custom templates or outside tools

• Reporting on submission-to-bind cycle time is possible but requires configuration

Tarmika

Tarmika is a commercial lines rating platform purpose-built for small commercial submission automation. It connects to multiple carriers and returns quotes in a single interface, reducing the time producers spend logging into individual carrier portals.

Strengths:

• Multi-carrier quoting in a single workflow — especially strong for BOP, GL, and workers' comp

• Quote-to-bind tracking is cleaner than AMS-native tools for small commercial

• API connectivity to push quote data back into Applied Epic and other platforms

Limitations:

• Does not cover all lines — large commercial, specialty, and surplus lines require outside submission

• Not a full AMS; it is a rating layer that sits alongside your primary system

• Follow-up automation for non-responsive carriers is not a native feature

HubSpot

HubSpot is a general-purpose CRM increasingly used by insurance agencies for pipeline management, including commercial new business tracking.

Strengths:

• Pipeline deal stages can be configured for submission-to-bind workflow

• Automated sequences for carrier follow-up are easy to set up

• Strong reporting on deal velocity, stage duration, and conversion rate

• Connects to email and calendar for a complete activity log

Limitations:

• No native insurance industry context — all configuration is from scratch

• Does not integrate natively with Applied Epic or other industry AMS platforms

• Works best as a front-end pipeline tool, not a replacement for your AMS

The 3-Way Comparison Table

When NOT to use US Tech Automations: If your agency is 100% Applied Epic-native and your producers already use the activity module consistently for follow-up, the incremental value of adding an automation layer is limited. US Tech Automations is most valuable for agencies that have gaps between their AMS, their email workflow, and their carrier portal activity — or for agencies whose producers do not consistently log submission status updates in the AMS.

The Submission Tracking Workflow Recipe

This is the step-by-step workflow for agencies that want to close the submission tracking gap without replacing their AMS.

1. Standardize the submission log format. Every submission going out — regardless of carrier or line — gets logged with: prospect name, carrier name, line of business, submission date, assigned producer, expected quote date (typically 5 business days for small commercial, 10 for larger accounts).

2. Trigger a 5-day follow-up alert. If no quote status update is recorded within 5 business days of the submission date, trigger an alert to the producer: "Quote pending — follow up with [carrier]."

3. Escalate at day 10. If no response after 10 business days, escalate to the account manager and flag the submission in your pipeline report.

4. Log quote receipt immediately. When a quote arrives — by email, portal, or phone — log it in the submission record within the same business day. Include premium, key terms, and any exclusions.

5. Build the comparison automatically. Once all quotes are received (or the follow-up window has closed), the comparison matrix generates from the logged quote data. This should not require manual spreadsheet entry.

6. Record the bind decision. When the client selects a carrier, log the bind date, bound premium, and carrier confirmation number. Close out all other submission records as "declined/not bound."

7. Trigger the carrier notification workflow. Non-bound carriers should receive a standard "bound elsewhere" notification — this maintains the relationship and provides data for your carrier performance reporting.

8. Update the AMS policy record. The bound submission should automatically update the prospect record in Applied Epic (or your primary AMS) to an active policy with the correct effective date and premium.

9. Generate win/loss data. Every closed submission — bound or not — contributes to carrier performance tracking. Which carriers quote fastest? Which have the highest bind rate? This data improves future submission strategy.

10. Send post-bind onboarding trigger. The bound policy triggers a client onboarding sequence: welcome email, payment instructions, certificate of insurance request, and 90-day service check-in.

Claims processing cycle times in P&C insurance remain a key differentiator for carriers, according to NAIC 2024 Claims Processing Benchmark — and agencies that track their own submission-to-bind cycle times with the same rigor can make evidence-based carrier selection decisions.

Roughly 15–20% of commercial new business submissions are never followed up on after the initial send, according to Applied Systems 2024 Independent Agency Operations Report, representing a consistent and preventable revenue leak at most mid-market agencies.

Quote response time from small commercial carriers averages 4.2 business days, according to NAIC 2024 Claims Processing Benchmark data on commercial underwriting timelines, making a 5-business-day follow-up trigger the appropriate threshold for most standard lines submissions.

Submission Tracking Benchmarks

Glossary of Submission Tracking Terms

Submission: A completed application package sent to a carrier or MGA requesting a commercial lines quote.

AMS (Agency Management System): The core platform for managing agency operations, including client records, policies, and activities. Applied Epic, HawkSoft, and AMS360 are common examples.

MGA (Managing General Agent): A wholesale intermediary that binds coverage on behalf of one or more carriers, often for specialty or non-standard risks.

Bind: The formal instruction to the carrier to place the coverage in force, typically confirmed by a binder document.

Quote window: The period during which a submitted application is being reviewed by underwriting. Standard small commercial windows are 5–7 business days.

Win/loss tracking: The practice of recording the outcome of every submission — bound, declined, or not competitive — to measure producer performance and carrier effectiveness.

Carrier performance report: An agency-level report tracking quote responsiveness, bind rate, and competitive positioning by carrier. Used to prioritize which carriers receive first-call submissions.

Getting Started with Submission Tracking Automation

US Tech Automations complements your existing AMS and submission tools to close the tracking gaps described above. The implementation starts with mapping your current submission workflow — where status is tracked, who receives alerts, and which follow-up steps are currently manual.

For most commercial P&C agencies running Applied Epic, the integration connects the AMS activity module, email, and a lightweight pipeline view so that submission status is always current without manual entry.

See the full pricing details to understand the investment relative to your current submission volume and the commercial premium at stake.

For related reading on e-signature workflows that complement the bind confirmation step, see insurance e-signature workflow: DocuSign and NowCerts. For AMS comparison guidance, see Applied Epic vs. AMS360 for mid-sized agencies.

FAQs

What is the biggest cause of new business submission losses for commercial agencies?

Non-responsive carrier follow-up is the most common cause. A submission is sent, no quote arrives within the expected window, and the producer assumes the carrier passed. In many cases, the submission was received but not yet assigned to an underwriter. A 5-day automated follow-up trigger catches most of these cases.

Does Applied Epic track submission status automatically?

Applied Epic logs submission activities and supports manual status tracking through its workflow module. However, it does not automatically detect when a quote window has passed without a response, nor does it trigger follow-up alerts without a configured activity reminder set by a producer.

Is HubSpot a good AMS replacement for insurance agencies?

No. HubSpot is a strong pipeline management and follow-up tool, but it lacks the policy lifecycle management, carrier connectivity, and compliance features that an AMS provides. Most agencies use HubSpot as a front-end new business CRM alongside their AMS, not as a replacement.

How does Tarmika differ from a traditional submission workflow?

Tarmika is a multi-carrier rating platform — it automates the process of getting quotes from multiple carriers simultaneously for small commercial risks. It is not a submission tracker for mid-market or large commercial accounts that require individual carrier submissions. For those accounts, you still need AMS-based tracking or a dedicated pipeline tool.

What data should every submitted account have in the tracking system?

At minimum: prospect name, coverage type, carrier(s) submitted, submission date, assigned producer, expected quote date, and current status. Comprehensive tracking also includes quoted premium for each carrier, exclusions noted, and bind/no-bind outcome.

How do I measure my agency's submission-to-bind cycle time?

Export your submission log for the prior 90 days. For each bound account, calculate the number of business days from submission date to bind date. Average those numbers by line of business and by carrier. This gives you your baseline cycle time and identifies which carriers or lines are slowest.