We have Benchmarked Vero against three main client concerns:

• Claims handling: Strong local service network and good reputation for responsiveness in the commercial portfolio. However, during surge events (e.g. large NatCat losses), capacity can be stretched, leading to slower resolution times.

• Price competitiveness: Frequently competitive on commercial property and strata/Body Corporate business in the NZ market, benefiting from scale and local brokerage partnerships.

• Property appetite: Broad appetite for commercial property, business insurance and industrial/warehousing where risk profiles are standard and well managed.

We've found Vero is a great fit for:

• Commercial property portfolios – competitive across office, retail, and mixed-use.

• Commercial Body Corporates – wide cover with strong sub-limit structures.

• Residential Body Corporate – appetite for standard residential body Corporates.

• ACP Clad Buildings - Vero takes a proactive approach when it comes to ACP

• Industrial – selective, but competitive for well-managed light-to-medium industrial risks.

We've found Vero may not be the best fit for:

• High NatCat zones – while capable, Vero is more conservative regarding earthquake and flood-prone locations and may impose stricter terms/deductibles in these areas.

• Older / specialised construction – buildings with deferred maintenance, seismic vulnerabilities or non-standard materials may attract restrictive terms or higher premium.

• High-hazard industrial / warehousing – occupancies involving flammable goods, complex manufacturing or heavy hazard exposures may fall outside Vero’s most competitive appetite.

• Large property portfolios / capacity-intensive placements – While Vero has strong backing, properties over $25M Vero tend to obtain re-insurance on a n individual basis, causing potential price increases.