It is a Monday morning in June. A credit control lead at a specialty MGA — let's call her Sarah — opens her laptop to find that twelve broker remittances landed over the weekend. In the old workflow, the one she ran for three years, her Monday morning looked like this: open four screens, download the bank statement, pull the weekend's bordereaux from five different portals, start matching. By lunch she would have cleared maybe six of the twelve. The rest would carry into Tuesday because two of them involved a broker who changed his column headers last month and one involved a cross-jurisdiction tax discrepancy she needed to trace back through three emails.
That was then. This is what her Monday looks like now.
Brisc AI's Reconciliation Analyst is an insurance-native AI system that automates the matching of cash to contracts — bank receipts to bordereaux to ledger entries — for MGAs and reinsurers. It retains every broker quirk, every format pattern, every exception resolution the team has ever encountered, and applies that institutional memory to every new transaction without the team having to rebuild context each time. Sarah's Monday morning has changed because the heavy lifting — the four-screen, seventeen-tab, three-email tracing work — now happens before she opens her laptop.
What follows is a step-by-step walkthrough of what the agentic cash-ops workflow actually looks like in practice. Not the demo version. The daily-operations version.
Broker remittances land in the bank account. Bordereaux arrive via email, portal, SFTP, or — in the case of one particularly old-fashioned broker — fax-to-PDF. The Reconciliation Analyst ingests all of it without waiting for a human to download, sort, or rename anything.
The critical difference from the manual workflow is format memory. The Analyst has already seen how each of these brokers formats their data. Broker A sends a PDF with premium in column G. Broker B sends an Excel file with tabs that don't match the column headers. Broker C sends the same data in two different files because two different internal teams produce two different reports. The Analyst knows all of this because it learned it on the first encounter and never forgot it — unlike the senior analyst who retires in August and takes thirty years of broker-format knowledge with them.
A bank statement entry says "WIRE TXN 8847291." The Analyst maps it to a specific program, a specific period, a specific broker, and a specific set of bordereaux line items. In the manual workflow, this step takes a senior operator fifteen to forty-five minutes per case, depending on complexity. The Analyst completes it in seconds because it draws on the accumulated dictionary of every prior match — the pattern library that tells it that this broker's wire reference format always starts with the program code reversed, or that this cedant consistently truncates the policy reference at twelve characters.
This is where knowledge retention — not speed — is the value. The Analyst is not faster because it processes characters more quickly. Brisc's Reconciliation Analyst is faster because it does not need to re-establish context. Every match it has ever resolved becomes part of its permanent working memory. McKinsey estimates that 30-40% of underwriter and operations time goes to administrative work that could be automated. The portion attributable to re-establishing context on cash matching — re-reading old emails, re-checking broker formats, re-tracing discrepancies already resolved last quarter — is where the Reconciliation Analyst eliminates the most waste.
The three-way match: bordereaux line items to bank receipts to general ledger entries. In the manual workflow, this is the seventeen-tab spreadsheet. One MGA we work with traced a $47,000 discrepancy through three months of broker correspondence before finding the root cause — a transposed reference code in a single remittance.
The Reconciliation Analyst performs this match automatically for every transaction, assigning a confidence score. High-confidence matches — typically around 80% of the volume for an established program — flow through without human involvement. Helix Underwriting Partners reports that the Reconciliation Analyst removed 80% of the manual labour from their reconciliation workflow. The residual 20% is the interesting work: the edge cases, the genuine discrepancies, the items that require human judgment rather than human data entry.
Not everything matches cleanly. Part-payments. Over-payments. FX variance. Cross-jurisdiction tax discrepancies — UK Insurance Premium Tax versus EU stamp duty is the number-one matching blocker for MGAs operating across European borders. Format drift: a broker who silently changed their column definitions between March and April without telling anyone.
In the manual workflow, exceptions go into a queue that the team works in order of materiality, often weeks after they first appeared. In the agentic workflow, every exception arrives pre-classified. The Analyst tells the reviewer: this is an FX timing variance of £2,400 on the Sterling leg of a multi-currency binder. Here is the proposed resolution based on the three times this exact pattern occurred in the past eight months. The human decides whether to accept, modify, or escalate — but the Analyst did the research.
This is the structural shift: humans move from doing the investigative work to reviewing the Analyst's proposed resolution. The average team spends 90-180 days training a new hire to the point where they can handle exceptions independently. The Analyst carries that institutional expertise from day one and never needs to be retrained when it encounters a familiar pattern in a new context.
The human review queue in an agentic cash-ops workflow contains only the items that genuinely require judgment. A broker dispute. A catastrophe-event allocation. A treaty rule edge case where two legitimate interpretations of the commission structure yield different numbers. A new cedant whose format has never been seen before.
What humans no longer do: data entry. Re-keying numbers from one system to another. Downloading files from five portals. Chasing reference codes through email threads. Re-establishing context on a case they saw three months ago but have since forgotten the resolution to.
Brisc's architecture routes approximately 5-10% of transactions to human review. Those are the cases that need a human brain — not because the data is complex, but because the decision requires commercial judgment that only a human with relationship context can provide. The other 90-95% flows through with 97%+ accuracy, audited and documented automatically.
Once a match is confirmed — whether automatically or via human review — the journal entry posts to the general ledger, the treasury system, or the policy administration system. The difference from the manual workflow: every posting carries full document lineage. The auditor can trace any entry back to the source bordereau, the source bank statement, the confidence score, and — if a human reviewed it — the reviewer's decision and reasoning.
In the old workflow, this lineage was reconstructed at quarter-end. Finance teams spent the last two weeks of every quarter rebuilding the paper trail for the period's transactions. In the agentic workflow, the trail is constructed as a by-product of the match itself. It exists the moment the match is confirmed, not three months later when someone asks.
Brisc customers report 59% labour cost reduction across their cash-ops function. That number is not primarily about matching faster — it is about eliminating the reconstruction work, the quarter-end scramble, and the time spent re-establishing context on cases that should never have required re-investigation.
The CFO asks for the matched cash position on the property cat book. In a traditional workflow, the answer is "I can tell you where we were six weeks ago." In the agentic workflow, the answer is current as of the last settlement cycle.
Every match, every exception resolution, every human review decision, every posting is logged in plain English with full document references. One specialty Bermuda reinsurer we spoke with carries more than 400 active treaties, each with its own settlement terms, commission structures, and deduction schedules. The manual cost of maintaining audit readiness across that portfolio was approximately $250-400K per year in onshore and outsourced headcount. The Analyst produces the audit trail as an automatic output of the matching process — not as a separate documentation exercise.
A multi-year audit at one reinsurance client uncovered a 12% true profitability discrepancy that had accumulated over several reporting periods — invisible under periodic manual reconciliation, caught immediately when continuous automated matching was applied. The audit trail is not a compliance checkbox. It is the system that prevents hidden profitability erosion.
Sarah opens her laptop. The twelve weekend remittances have already been ingested, identified, and matched. Ten of the twelve cleared automatically with high confidence. Two are in her review queue: one is the broker with the new column headers (the Analyst flagged it as a format-drift exception and proposed a mapping based on the previous quarter's layout), and one is a genuine £3,200 discrepancy on a cross-border tax calculation that requires her commercial judgment.
She resolves both before her first coffee gets cold. The rest of her morning is spent on the work that actually needs a senior operator: a call with a broker about a commission structure change, a review of next quarter's programme forecasts, and an onboarding session for a new cedant whose formats the Analyst hasn't seen before.
Her team of five handles the same volume that used to require twelve. Not because they work harder, and not because the Analyst is fast — but because the Analyst remembers everything the team has ever taught it, and applies that memory every single time without being asked.
That is what "agentic" means in insurance cash operations. Not autonomous. Not replacing the human. Remembering what the human taught it, so the human never has to teach it twice.
What does "agentic" mean in the context of cash-ops automation? An agentic system acts on its own within defined boundaries — ingesting, matching, classifying, and posting — while routing exceptions to human reviewers for judgment calls. Brisc's Reconciliation Analyst handles the repeatable work autonomously and escalates the genuinely uncertain cases.
How long does the Reconciliation Analyst take to deploy? Typical deployment takes 2-6 weeks from contract to first production match. The system learns broker formats and programme structures during onboarding and improves continuously from the review queue.
What happens when a broker changes their format? The Analyst detects format drift automatically and flags it as an exception on first occurrence. Once a human confirms the new mapping, the Analyst applies it to all subsequent files from that broker — permanently.
What percentage of transactions still require human review? Approximately 5-10% of transactions route to the human review queue. These are genuine judgment calls — commercial disputes, novel formats, edge-case treaty interpretations — not data-entry tasks.
Does the Analyst replace our existing policy administration system? No. Brisc's Reconciliation Analyst is not a system of record. It matches cash to contracts, posts the result back to your existing PAS or GL (SICS, Orca, XFI, or native), and produces the audit trail. It sits alongside your platform, not instead of it.
What accuracy does the system achieve? Brisc's Reconciliation Analyst achieves 97%+ accuracy on bordereaux reconciliation. That accuracy improves over time as the system accumulates more broker-format patterns and exception-resolution history.
Can the Analyst handle multi-currency and cross-jurisdiction tax matching? Yes. FX variance, UK Insurance Premium Tax, EU stamp duties, and cross-border settlement differences are handled natively. The system learns jurisdiction-specific patterns from the review queue and applies them automatically on recurrence.
How does the Analyst retain institutional knowledge when staff turn over? Every match resolution, format mapping, and exception decision becomes part of the Analyst's permanent memory. When an experienced team member leaves — an event that occurs at 20-40% annual rates in insurance back offices — the knowledge stays in the system. New hires inherit the full institutional memory on day one rather than rebuilding it over 90-180 days.
See how Brisc's Reconciliation Analyst works with your data →