What Verdica's 798 score means for Grant & Weber
Grant & Weber's composite score of 798 out of 850 places the provider in the "strong" band (740–799), just below the "excellent" threshold. This score is based on aggregated regulatory data from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and reflects measurable compliance, financial stability, and customer complaint patterns.
A score in this range suggests that Grant & Weber meets or exceeds baseline regulatory standards and maintains financial reserves adequate to cover claims. However, the score also indicates room for improvement in at least one dimension—in this case, financial strength. Readers should interpret a 798 as a signal that the provider is operationally sound and poses low regulatory risk, but is not in the top tier across all metrics. This is a typical profile for a mid-to-large regional or national insurer with solid fundamentals.
For business owners or consumers evaluating Grant & Weber, this score supports proceeding with due diligence. The provider has not triggered major red flags, but the financial strength sub-score warrants a closer look at published financial reports or ratings from independent rating agencies (such as A.M. Best or Moody's) before committing to a long-term contract.
How the sub-scores break down
Financial Strength: 700 / 850
This sub-score reflects Grant & Weber's capital adequacy, reserves, and ability to pay claims over time. A score of 700 is below the "excellent" threshold but remains in an acceptable-to-strong range. In insurance, financial strength is critical: regulators require insurers to maintain minimum capital ratios and reserve funds to guard against insolvency. A score of 700 indicates that Grant & Weber meets these requirements but may have tighter margins than top-tier competitors or may operate in higher-risk lines of business that demand more capital relative to premium income. This is not a warning sign, but it does mean the provider has less financial cushion for unexpected large claims or economic downturns.
Complaints: 850 / 850
Grant & Weber scores at the maximum on complaint ratios, meaning the rate of customer complaints filed with state insurance regulators is very low relative to the company's premium volume or policy count. This is a strong indicator of customer satisfaction and operational reliability in claims processing, billing, and policy service. High complaint scores typically reflect timely claim settlements, clear policy language, responsive customer service, and few billing disputes.
Regulatory Actions: 850 / 850
This perfect sub-score indicates Grant & Weber has not accumulated significant enforcement actions, license suspensions, fines, or consent orders from state insurance commissioners or the NAIC. Regulatory action scores measure compliance with solvency rules, unfair trade practices laws, and market conduct standards. A maximum score means no material violations in Verdica's indexed data.
What regulators track for insurance providers
The NAIC maintains centralized databases of complaint ratios and enforcement actions across all licensed insurers. Complaint ratios are calculated as the number of substantiated complaints per thousand policies in force, adjusted for business type. Ratios above the industry average for a given line of business (auto, health, property, etc.) trigger regulatory scrutiny.
Financial strength ratings rely on statutory financial statements filed annually with state regulators. These statements measure solvency through risk-based capital ratios, liquidity, and loss reserves. Regulators also review underwriting practices, claims handling, and marketing conduct. Enforcement actions—fines, license restrictions, or orders to cease certain practices—become part of the public record and factor into compliance scores.
Bottom line
Grant & Weber presents as a financially sound, complaint-averse provider in good regulatory standing. The slight softness in financial strength is the only minor caution and warrants verification through third-party financial ratings. For most businesses or consumers, this is a credible option worth proceeding with; compare quotes and policy terms against competitors before deciding.