Case study · Bordereaux Analyst

Find what four years of bordereaux were hiding.

A Bermuda-based specialty reinsurer used Brisc’s Bordereaux Analyst to audit four years of premium and claims bordereaux, more than 100,000 premium records. The audit found a 12% uplift in true profitability hidden in misallocated and unprocessed data.

ProfileBermuda-based specialty reinsurer
ScopeFour years · 100,000+ premium records
Finding12% uplift in true profitability
The situation

Why did a profitable program need a second look?

A multi-year program had closed looking profitable, and the routine controls had signed it off every quarter. Leadership still wanted to know whether the profit was real and the controls were holding; standard reporting could answer neither.

The search

What the Analyst went looking for.

Claims with no policy

Losses paid against records no bound policy explains.

Losses outside policy periods

Dates validated against the policy, not the spreadsheet.

Premium anomalies

Rows that pass a monthly check and fail a four-year one.

Trust account variances

Collateral movements no bordereau accounts for.

The method

Every row, not a sample.

01

Ingest and normalise

Four years of bank statements, premium and loss bordereaux, and treaty documentation, normalised into one reconcilable dataset.

02

Reconcile with precision

Deterministic, explainable matching cross-references policies, claims and payments against the collateral accounts; anomalies are flagged, never smoothed over.

03

Deliver defensible outputs

A complete audit trail on every finding, treaty-level breakdowns, and a categorised discrepancy register with resolution recommendations.

The result

A 12% uplift in true profitability.

The discrepancies summed to a 12% uplift hidden in misallocated and unprocessed data, with every finding evidenced back to the source row, because the Analyst read everything instead of sampling it.

Common questions

Data quality audits, answered

What are hidden data quality issues in bordereaux?

Errors that individual monthly bordereaux pass through cleanly but that compound across a program: claims with no matching policy, losses booked outside policy periods, premium anomalies, and unexplained trust account variances. Each row looks plausible; the pattern only shows when every row is reconciled.

Can Brisc audit historical bordereaux, not just new ones?

Yes. This engagement was a back-book audit: four years of premium and claims bordereaux, bank statements and treaty documentation, more than 100,000 premium records, reconciled end to end.

Is the matching AI or rules?

Matching is deterministic, rule-based and explainable. AI reads the documents and argues the borderline cases; it never decides a match. That is what makes the findings defensible to auditors and counterparties.

What do you get at the end?

A complete audit trail on every finding, treaty-level performance breakdowns, and a categorised register of data quality issues, each with a resolution recommendation.

Why do sampling-based audits miss this?

A sample can validate rows; it cannot see patterns between them. An orphaned claim or a drifting trust balance only surfaces when every policy, claim and payment is reconciled against the others, which is exactly the work manual review cannot afford to do.

What's hiding in your bordereaux?

You cannot manage risks you cannot see, and you cannot see them by sampling once a year. Bring a real bordereau; we run it and you keep the findings.

Book the walkthrough