At one American auto insurance organization, agents and managers were spending 20-40% of their time managing Excel files for leads. The people responsible for selling memberships were also maintaining the machinery that told them whom to call. Managers compiled information manually. Updates arrived late. A sales operation had acquired a second occupation: spreadsheet administration.
- Exavalu connects insurance knowledge with software implementation.
- Its work targets slow handoffs across core systems, data and customer service.
- Reusable tools support projects; the reported savings belong to specific engagements.
That detail, tucked inside an Exavalu case study, makes the company easier to understand than a page of platform logos. Insurance businesses can own sophisticated applications while employees still stitch the workflow together. Exavalu sells help with the stitching: advice about what to change, engineers to change it, and support to keep it running.
The spreadsheet is part of the system
In the lead-management project, Exavalu used Pega to automate manual processes and create reusable business rules. Its account describes an eight-week minimum viable product built by seven or eight people, followed by two releases. Training reportedly fell from a week to a day; manager productivity rose 50%.
Those are company-reported results for one customer. But the delivery choices are instructive. The team defined the initial scope with sales stakeholders and planned for adoption. A new application has little practical value if the people using it keep their real work in a separate file.
The business behind the handoffs
Founded in 2018, Exavalu is led by founder and CEO Saurav Basu. Its focus is insurance and other regulated industries, including banking and healthcare. Buyers include carriers, brokers, reinsurers and managing general agents, the businesses that administer insurance programs. Their needs extend from underwriting and claims to billing, distribution and customer service.
The commercial model combines consulting, implementation and managed services with proprietary software components. A client might begin with an assessment, commission a migration, then retain help with production support and upgrades. Exavalu therefore occupies several parts of the technology budget, rather than selling a single application with a single job.
Its competitive proposition is industry familiarity combined with execution. Large systems integrators offer overlapping services; internal engineering teams are another option. Exavalu’s pitch is that people who understand insurance can carry a roadmap into the actual systems. Guidewire independently listed its Testing Standards specialization in July 2024, giving that pitch a specific credential.
The staffing proposition has a cultural side, too. Exavalu describes mentorship, professional certifications and knowledge sharing across teams in the United States, Canada and India. Consulting Magazine placed it first among midsized firms in its 2025 Best Firms to Work For ranking. That award does not establish project performance, but it is relevant to a business whose delivery depends on people. For a buyer, the practical follow-up is to ask who will stay with the engagement, how knowledge will transfer, and who will own the system once the implementation team moves on.
First, make the inventory smaller
Consider another auto insurer, this time struggling with legacy middleware: the software connecting applications. Exavalu describes unstable technology, limited reuse and inadequate support that prevented the IT team from responding promptly to business changes. The carrier wanted to move its services onto MuleSoft.
Exavalu began with an assessment and migration roadmap. A proprietary conversion tool analyzed more than 16 services across IBM integration technologies in weeks. The company says migration took less than six months, analysis effort fell 50%, and API maintenance costs declined 40% after consolidating platforms. These figures concern that project, rather than a universal price promise.
A separate reporting case makes an even more appealing argument for subtraction. Exavalu assessed more than 2,700 Business Objects reports, deciding which to migrate or consolidate. Its SourceIQ accelerator supported the work. The company reports a 72% reduction in report inventory, 38% lower IT support costs and a 6.5-fold improvement in user adoption.
The useful inference is straightforward: migration can be an opportunity to question the inventory. Carry every redundant report into a new environment and the organization brings yesterday’s clutter along with its data. The technical move and the decision about what deserves to survive are separate pieces of work.
Give the agent their time back
Exavalu also packages recurring insurance problems into Exasure, its suite for digital engagement, document processing, risk assessment and analytics. ExasureOne combines Guidewire InsuranceNow with implementation accelerators. The approach gives clients reusable starting points while allowing existing core platforms to remain part of the architecture.
There is a useful example of bounded AI at Rate Insurance. In September 2025, the brokerage announced a Salesforce Agentforce Assistant built with Exavalu to help staff find account information. The announcement projected 60% less research time and 40% higher productivity for retention specialists. Those numbers were expectations at launch.
“This technology gives our agents the freedom to spend less time searching and more time having meaningful conversations.”
Jeff Wingate · President, Rate Insurance
The assignment matters. Searching for account information is a defined task inside a larger relationship. An assistant that shortens that search gives an employee more room to serve the customer. It also gives the buyer something concrete to measure: research time before and after deployment.
A useful test for the buyer
In June 2026, Exavalu launched ExAite, an AI quality engineering platform linking requirements, test generation, execution and defect analysis. Its launch advertised 40-60% faster test cycles and up to 45% lower QA costs. A buyer should treat those as claims to test against its own applications and release process.
One sensible buying exercise is to compare the same narrow workflow across suppliers. Ask each team to show the current steps, the proposed steps, the integration dependencies and the ongoing support responsibilities. Then compare the effort left for the client. A prebuilt component is useful when it removes work from that particular environment; unfamiliar data or heavily customized processes can consume the apparent shortcut. That is an evaluation principle drawn from these cases, rather than a promise about any individual implementation.
The broader lesson travels well: identify a handoff, establish its cost in time or maintenance, and decide what a useful first release would remove. This approach depends on accessible data, compatible systems, clear ownership and people willing to change their routines. Buying an accelerator cannot supply those conditions. Exavalu’s most persuasive cases begin with the work employees are already doing to compensate for their software.