The Insurance Producer Profile, published by the National Alliance Research Academy (6th edition), is the only producer-level benchmark in the agency-benchmark literature. Where GPS and BPS report agency-level aggregates, this dataset reports individual-producer data — compensation method, level by experience cohort, level by agency size, and the patterns that emerge in producer compensation around M&A. The survey was conducted late 2021 through early 2022, with 80% of respondents holding the CIC designation. This page covers the dataset and why it matters to M&A.
Who the typical producer is.
The dataset's profile of the typical commercial-lines producer:
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Average compensation | $161,000 |
| Median compensation | $110,000 |
| Average age | 49 years |
| Average experience | 19 years |
| Average tenure at current agency | 14 years |
| Hold college degree | 75% |
| Hold CIC designation | 80% |
The average-median gap ($161K vs. $110K) reflects a right-skewed distribution — a minority of high-producing commercial producers pull the average well above the median. The 80% CIC-designated sample is the dataset's defining methodological caveat: CIC-designated producers are a quality skew, so the data overstates compensation, productivity, and experience-cohort sophistication relative to the broader independent-producer population. Analysts use this dataset as a top-quartile-leaning reference, not a population average.
Five methods, different economics.
The compensation-method breakdown is the dataset's most M&A-relevant cut:
| Method | % of producers | Avg. compensation |
|---|---|---|
| Straight commission | 35% | $185,000 |
| Salary + commission | 36% | $165,000 |
| Draw against commission | 16% | $145,000 |
| Salary only | 9% | $95,000 |
| Other | 4% | $120,000 |
The method distribution and the compensation differential are both load-bearing. Straight-commission producers earn the most ($185K average) — they bear the most income risk and, correspondingly, have the strongest production incentive. Salary-only producers earn the least ($95K) — typically service-oriented or junior roles. For a buyer evaluating a target, the producer compensation-method mix predicts the post-close retention dynamics: a straight-commission producer base is producer-driven and free-agent-prone; a salary-heavy base is more agency-anchored but less production-incentivized.
Add-back, value driver, retention risk.
Producer compensation is a major EBITDA add-back, producer quality is the #2-ranked Critical Factor affecting agency value (4.67/5.00), and producer-retention risk is a primary deal concern. The producer-level data answers questions the agency-level datasets cannot.
Three M&A workflows consume producer-level data:
- EBITDA add-back analysis — owner-producer compensation above the market-rate benchmark is a Pro-Forma add-back; the per-method and per-experience benchmarks calibrate what "market rate" means.
- Producer-quality assessment — producer quality scores 4.67/5.00 as a value driver; the experience and productivity benchmarks help a buyer assess whether the target's producer base is above or below the reference.
- Retention-risk modeling — the compensation-method mix predicts free-agent risk; the post-M&A compensation-impact patterns inform the retention-engineering plan.
Producer compensation pairs with the BPS producer metrics (the agency-level productivity benchmarks) and the seller-side compensation management cluster (which operationalizes comp strategy for the seller preparing to transact). The broader agency benchmarks unified reference Pillar covers all four datasets.