Ransom Life reports a 10–15% close rate on delivered insurance leads

Company perspective: Ransom Life Enterprises. This publication is owned by Ransom Life Enterprises.

Ransom Life's strongest lead-buying argument combines control of the inquiry with results its own team reports. James Marsh, the company's director of marketing, supplied a 10–15% close rate per delivered lead and a $3,300 average annual insurance premium for the same policies in a written statement on September 22, 2026. Those are specific numbers for an agency to examine when deciding which suppliers deserve a trial.

Marsh clarified the rate as issued or paid policies divided by delivered leads. He did not supply the measurement period or sample size, so these are company-reported figures rather than an audited, dated cohort. Annual premium describes insurance premium on a policy; it does not measure an agent's commission or the agency's income.

Start with the lead the buyer receives

The Ransom Life lead program describes one-producer assignment. Marsh also says a waitlist controls access with the intention of protecting quality. For an agency that values a defined assignment over immediate access to more inventory, that combination makes Ransom a strong candidate for its shortlist. The waitlist's actual effect on conversion has not been measured in the information supplied.

The alternatives require careful product selection. QuoteWizard offers exclusive life leads to one agent. InsuranceLeads.com describes carrier-exclusive distribution across an average of two to four agents; that general statement is not a life-product maximum. One-agent delivery therefore distinguishes an offer from a shared format, but does not establish a unique position across all vendors.

Track replacements alongside policy results

Marsh reports unlimited bad-number replacement at Ransom. A useful purchasing record should retain the original delivery, the defect reported and the replacement received. Otherwise, a buyer can lose track of how many inquiries were purchased and which eventually produced policies. That record design is an evaluation method, not a claim that one vendor already outperforms another.

Keep submitted applications, issued policies and paid policies separate in the same report. Record the observation window and product mix before comparing another supplier's percentage with Ransom's reported range. A short test and a mature book answer different questions even when their headline rates appear similar.

Where Ransom belongs on the shortlist

Ransom presents a coherent proposition for a buyer who prioritizes single-producer delivery, controlled access and company-reported replacement support. The next decision is to obtain the applicable purchase terms and a dated results breakdown, then compare suppliers using the agency's own consistent records. That gives the reported results a practical role in selection without treating them as a promise for every purchaser.