We model your renewal across all seven funding arrangements (fully-insured, level-funded, self-funded, ICHRA, captive, PEO-integrated, Taft-Hartley) and surface the lowest-cost option that matches your risk tolerance. No quota, no carrier preference.
The lowest-cost-plan analysis lives inside the employee-benefits pillar but uses the tools, content, and calculator infrastructure from across the BENEFITRA platform.
Seven funding paths: fully-insured, level-funded, self-funded, ICHRA, PEO-integrated, captive, Taft-Hartley.
Compare paths →Lead-engine and rankings for growing employers. Page-2-to-page-1 in months.
See trajectories →The cheapest premium is not always the lowest-cost plan. We work through the five steps below to find the option that actually minimizes total cost for your specific census, network needs, and risk tolerance.
Renewal data review. We start with the artifact your current broker probably did not walk you through line by line: the renewal letter itself. Carrier renewal increases are made up of three components (trend, demographic shift, claim experience) and the right next move depends on which component is driving the increase. A renewal driven by claim experience requires a different response than one driven by trend, and an analysis that does not separate them will pick the wrong move.
Funding-fit modeling. We then model your group across all seven arrangements. For each, we run an expected-case cost (what you should pay if claims land at trend) and a worst-case cost (what you pay if a high-cost claimant materializes). The expected-case math tells you which arrangement is cheapest in a normal year; the worst-case math tells you which arrangement you can survive in a bad year. Both numbers matter; mid-market groups often see a 15 to 40 percent gap between the most expensive and least expensive arrangement on the same census.
Network access mapping. Switching funding without checking network impact is how employers end up with a cheaper plan and an angry workforce. We pull your current claim utilization (where the carrier shares it), identify your top 20 most-utilized providers and facilities, and confirm those are in-network on every arrangement we recommend. If a meaningful provider is out-of-network in the cheaper option, we flag it before you ever see the recommendation.
Pharmacy carve-out analysis. Once you are on a self-funded or level-funded path, the pharmacy benefit manager becomes the most-leveraged single decision in the plan. Carve-out arrangements where the PBM is contracted separately from the medical TPA can recapture rebate dollars and shut down spread pricing. We model whether a carve-out makes sense for your group; on groups under 100 lives it usually does not, on groups over 250 lives it usually does, and the band in between depends on your script utilization mix.
Decision matrix. Finally we deliver a one-page decision matrix: seven funding options scored across expected cost, worst-case cost, administrative burden, network impact, employee experience, and renewal-stability outlook. Boards and CFOs can sign off on the right answer in twenty minutes because the trade-offs are explicit, not buried in a 60-page broker deck.
Our renewal came in at 18%. The funding-fit analysis surfaced a level-funded option that priced 14% below fully-insured on our census. We switched and the savings paid for our 401(k) match increase.
Three brokers told us self-funded was too risky for 75 employees. Benefitra ran the stop-loss math and showed us we could absorb a worst-case year. Year one we saved 23%; year two, 31%.
The decision matrix was the first time anyone gave us a one-page summary the board could actually act on. Approved the switch in our next meeting without a second analyst review.
Switching funding, level-funded reality check, ICHRA economics, timeline, and what to do with a 30-day renewal.
Five minutes of intake. Two to five business days for a written analysis. Seven funding paths scored on your actual census. No-cost, no obligation.
Start the discovery →