Germany's insurance-intermediary register has shrunk by roughly a third since 2011, from 263,452 to 178,791 entries. Only one group is growing: independent brokers, at 47,244 the highest level in the published register series (1 July 2026), where "growing" is relative, that is about six percent more than in 2011. This only stable group is also the oldest: in the AfW intermediary barometer, 67 percent of respondents are over 50, the average is 53.7 years, and every second one wants succession settled within eight to nine years at most. The average firm behind that, per the 2024 procontra survey: around 450 clients, roughly 2,000 contracts, one employee. The AfW puts average revenue at €243,000 with €79,000 profit, and half stay below €50,000.
A firm of that size lives or dies by where the working time goes. On that there is an uncomfortable number: in the 2021 broker barometer, brokers reported spending more than half their working time on IT and paperwork, and clearly less than half on clients. 65 percent would hand the office work off completely if they could. Advice, the thing that defines the profession and that no system may take over, is the smallest line item of the workday.
Why administration eats so much
The core of the problem is data exchange with insurers, which a current decision-maker study by Versicherungsforen Leipzig (January 2026) dryly names the industry's "efficiency killer." The technical reality behind it: the GDV data format, through which much portfolio data flows, dates conceptually from 1987, is typically delivered as a monthly batch and cannot carry documents at all. The more modern BiPRO standard exists, but the norm is voluntary and many insurers implement only the base level that transfers PDFs; specialists compress this into the sentence "a BiPRO norm is not an implementation." The result is a patchwork of GDV deliveries, portal downloads and real interfaces, different for every insurer.
Broker management systems can do little about that, and usage shows it: per the procontra survey, 72 percent of brokers use their system for document access, but only 39 percent for portfolio analyses and 23 percent for claims. The software is a filing cabinet, not a tool.
The 2025/26 AI wave: nine months, one topic
Since November 2025 nearly every relevant vendor has shipped AI: Keasy by vfm with a remarkably deep claims pipeline, Assfinet with AI inbox processing, blau direkt with its AMEISE COPILOT, Smart InsurTech with contract-data extraction, VEMA with VAIA. The Fonds Finanz "AI hub" turns out on closer inspection to be a Make.com platform with templates, which is not a bad thing, just not a proprietary AI. Whoever works through one of these pools or systems should activate those features before hiring an agency; we say so explicitly in intro calls.
Two things stand out about this wave. First, the direction: almost everything targets the inbox, meaning classification, extraction, summarization. Second, the evidence: every performance claim comes from the vendors themselves, and after nine months of product age, independent validation simply does not exist yet.
What is missing across the whole shelf is the proactive side: renewal and expiry management, systematic portfolio hygiene, occasion-based client outreach. That is bitter irony, because exactly this work determines what a portfolio is worth at handover, and handover is no longer distant theory for half the industry. The inbox gets smart. The portfolio, whose condition sets your sale price, remains manual labor.
What legally stays with the broker
The guardrails are clear, and they do not obstruct office automation. The personal recommendation including stated reasons for each piece of advice is demanded of the broker personally by § 61 of the German insurance contract act; an AI system may prepare it, not pronounce it, and for the documentation under § 62 the broker is liable under § 63, not his tooling. Health data from private-health or disability applications is Article 9 data, so it never belongs in consumer AI accounts, only in systems with a data processing agreement. From 2 August 2026, customer-facing AI must identify itself as such. And EIOPA formulated in August 2025 the expectation that is standard in our projects anyway: human oversight over every AI output. In Austria, where 3,935 active brokers face around 10,000 active agent memberships (including tip-givers), § 28 of the broker act even explicitly requires ongoing review of contracts, a duty whose preparation automates beautifully while the judgment stays with the broker.
For a firm of one and a half people and 2,000 contracts, the math ends up simple: every hour recovered from the patchwork between inbox, portals and management system is either advice time or portfolio care, and both pay twice, once in operations and once at sale. Whether it pays off for your book, the 60-second check will indicate; what such projects cost is in the pricing overview, with sources, and how we build sign-offs in draft plus sign-off.
As of 10 July 2026, not legal advice. Sources: DIHK intermediary register (1 Jan and 1 Jul 2026), AfW 16th intermediary barometer (2024), procontra broker surveys (2023/2024), Policen Direkt broker barometer 2021, Versicherungsforen Leipzig "Maklermarkt der Zukunft" (January 2026), GDV data-format documentation, BiPRO trade criticism (Convista, Insurgo, VSP June 2026), vendor releases 11/2025 to 7/2026, §§ 60-63 VVG, § 34d GewO, EIOPA opinion on AI governance (August 2025), Art. 50 EU AI Act, § 28 MaklerG (Austria), WKO broker fact sheet (May 2026).