Insurtech in Italy 2026: The Market Map and Why Buying Software Does Not Mean Innovating

A billion euros that conceals a paradox

If you look only at the headlines of the press releases, 2025 was the best year ever for Italian insurtech: over one billion euros of total investment in the digital insurance sector. A figure that, until a few years ago, would have seemed like science fiction for a market considered slow and resistant to change.

But beneath that billion lies a far less linear story. That capital is concentrated in few hands, channelled increasingly towards projects developed in-house by the large insurers, while collaborations with innovative startups are declining for the second year running. The market is moving, but not in the direction many expected. And for the intermediary, the agent, the broker, the structured firm, this map profoundly changes the rules of the game.

The underlying question of this article is simple and uncomfortable: in a market where everyone claims to be "doing insurtech", who is really innovating and who is merely buying technology? And above all, where do you fit into this picture?

The 2026 snapshot: fewer players, greater concentration

Let's start with the numbers, because here they matter more than opinions. The source is twofold and authoritative: the Fintech & Insurtech Observatory of the Politecnico di Milano and the Italian Insurtech Association (IIA), which every year produce the sector's Investment Index.

The first figure concerns the startup ecosystem. At the end of 2025 there were 485 active fintech and insurtech startups in Italy, down from 596 in 2024. At first glance this looks like a slowdown, but it is the opposite: it is a process of consolidation. The players that remain are more solid. The median revenue forecast for 2025 reached 700,000 euros, up 29% from 500,000 euros in 2024 and 50% from 2023. Almost one startup in two (46%) has already reached break-even. Fewer companies, but more mature ones: the market is being winnowed.

The second figure, more relevant for those who distribute policies, concerns the insurers. According to the IIA Investment Index, the digitalisation index of the Italian insurance market rose from 18 to 19 on a scale of 30. Real but modest progress, and above all driven by a few players. 55% of the insurers analysed made at least one investment in insurtech startups, a sharp increase from 38% in 2024. The capital deployed in these operations grew impressively, from 38 million to 541.6 million euros. But, and this is the key point, the number of deals fell from 11 to 9. A lot of money, very few recipients.

Then there is the front of internal investment, and this is where the map gets interesting. In 2025 insurers allocated 489 million euros to innovative projects developed in-house, against 375 million in 2024. 91% of the sample launched at least one internal initiative. Yet the total number of projects fell from 145 to 131, while the average value per initiative rose from 2.8 to 3.7 million. The same pattern as with partnerships: agreements with insurtech firms fell from 38 to 35, even though the share of insurers with at least one active collaboration is growing (50%, up 12 points).

The director of the Observatory, Filippo Renga, summed up the trend clearly: the growth in investment is positive, but insurers prefer to internalise innovation rather than co-develop it with the external ecosystem. The scientific director Marco Giorgino got even more to the point: traditional operators are back at centre stage and are "shopping" for technology and talent. Translated: those with the capital buy, build in-house, and centralise.

The distinction that changes everything: buying software ≠ innovating

At this point it is worth pausing to make a distinction that most industry content carefully avoids, because it is awkward to explain when you are selling licences.

Buying software and innovating are two different things. Often they are even opposites.

A large insurer that allocates 3.7 million to an internal project is innovating: it is building an infrastructure that reflects its business model, its products, its processes. It is an investment that belongs to it and that sets it apart. That same pattern, scaled down to the level of the intermediary, is exactly the difference between those who adopt standardised management software, the same one used by hundreds of competing colleagues, and those who build digital tools shaped around their own way of working.

When you buy off-the-shelf software, you are not innovating: you are buying the standardised version of someone else's innovation. And because it is standardised, it is available to anyone with the same sum to spend. You know the result: instead of the software adapting to your workflows, it is you who has to reorganise established procedures to "fit" into the system's rigid logic. You add manual steps to fill the gaps, keep parallel Excel sheets for the exceptions, train staff on unnatural procedures and, the worst damage of all, give up the competitive differentiators the software does not support. It is a theme we addressed in detail in the article on insurtech and software for insurance intermediaries.

Think of the broker specialising in professional liability or medical malpractice risks, with their assessment algorithms and their specific document workflows. For them, standard management software is not a neutral tool: it is a cage. Their competitive advantage lies precisely in what sets them apart from the others, and software designed for "everyone" flattens exactly that difference.

The 2026 market map, read from this perspective, says something precise: the more structured insurers have understood that real innovation comes from building something of their own. They have stopped buying scattershot and have begun to concentrate resources on more substantial internal projects. The question, then, is why the intermediary should reason in the opposite way, settling for consuming yet another package identical to the one used by the competitor next door.

A word of caution: this does not mean an intermediary has to invest millions or become a software house. It means changing the criterion for choosing. No longer "which is the most complete software on the market", but "what do I need to build so that it reflects how I work, my specialisations, my relationship with clients and with the insurers I collaborate with". It is the difference between being subject to someone else's innovation and equipping yourself with your own, on a sustainable scale.

Where the intermediary sits on the map

Having made the distinction, the concrete question remains: in practice, what can an agent or broker do who does not have an insurer's budget but does not want to remain a passive consumer of technology either?

The first possible position is that of the informed consumer. Not everything needs to be built to measure: for some standardised functions, a generic tool works perfectly well. The mistake is to use it for the processes that instead define your professional identity. The practical rule is simple: standardise what is a commodity, customise what sets you apart.

The second position, more ambitious and more profitable in the medium term, is that of the intermediary who builds their own digital infrastructure, gradually and by priority. You don't start by redoing everything. You start with the process that today consumes the most time or generates the most errors. For many firms it is managing deadlines and renewals; for others it is opening and monitoring claims, an activity that, as we showed in the article on claims handling for intermediaries, can absorb hundreds of hours a year; for others still it is reading portfolio data to identify cross-selling opportunities and clients at risk of leaving.

The common thread is always the same: data. The intermediary with years of activity sits on an information asset, clients, policies, claims, renewals, that in most cases remains scattered and unused. The large insurer has understood that this asset is an asset. The same is true, on a smaller scale, for those who distribute. An overview of the products that make this approach concrete can be found in the article dedicated to insurtech for intermediaries.

Finally, there is a contextual point not to be forgotten. Digital transformation does not replace the intermediary: it makes them more central. IIA research shows that, despite the growth of digital channels and the online purchase of policies, the vast majority of clients continue to ask for clarity, transparency and human support at the moments that matter. Intermediaries are entered in the Single Register of Intermediaries (RUI) managed by IVASS precisely because they embody an advisory and protective function that no algorithm can replicate. Technology does not serve to eliminate that role, but to amplify it: freeing up time from administration to devote to the relationship and to advice.

What the map really says

2025 hands us a market that has surpassed one billion euros of investment but that remains polarised: a few large players concentrating resources and internalising innovation, an ecosystem of startups that is consolidating, and a mass of intermediaries at risk of remaining spectators, buying standardised software in the hope of "keeping up". Forecasts for 2026 confirm the course, around 250 million euros will be allocated to artificial intelligence, equal to 15% of the sector's total spending, and they tell us that the gap between those who build and those who consume is set to widen.

The good news is that the choice does not depend on the size of your budget, but on the criterion by which you decide. Innovating, for an intermediary, does not mean spending like an insurer. It means equipping yourself, methodically and gradually, with digital tools that are truly yours, that reflect how you work and that grow with your organisation, instead of forcing you to adapt to logic designed for others.

At A126 we design and develop tailor-made digital solutions for insurance intermediaries. We do not resell off-the-shelf software licences: we start from your real operational workflow and build applications that adapt to your organisation and integrate with the systems you already use. If you want to understand where you sit on this map, and which process it makes sense to digitalise first in your specific case, contact us for a free consultation.

A126 Corporate Advisors — Tailor-made digital tools for those who don't just want to buy technology, but to build their own.