Eubrics found no public activation benchmark for IMO insurance or FMO insurance networks. We searched for a public activation benchmark for IMO insurance and FMO insurance networks and found none. Our reading is that an IMO or FMO gains more from activating the agents it already contracts than from recruiting more. So FMO training should be judged by what agents practice and what the distributor can measure.

By Nikita Jain,

On October 6, 2026, we searched for a public benchmark of how many contracted agents an IMO or FMO activates. We found none.

In a fall 2024 LIMRA and NAILBA survey of more than 60 BGAs and IMOs, more than 8 in 10 named two top priorities: selling more of their current products and expanding their network of financial professionals (LIMRA, March 3, 2025).

Ritter Insurance Marketing says a wider network improves an FMO's standing with carriers. Brokers Alliance says an IMO is paid on business that issues. Our reading: together, these show where an activation gap can sit.

An IRS training presentation says training on how to do a job is "strong evidence the worker's an employee." Our reading: distributors may hesitate to require training. This is not legal advice.

The Missouri producer report we opened counts producers licensed, appointed and terminated. It does not count producers who wrote business.

What problem does an IMO or FMO have to solve?

Why does a recruiting-led model create an activation problem?

Is there a public benchmark for how many agents are active?

Why does traditional FMO training fail to scale?

What does scaled practice change?

How do you measure productivity when agents are not employees?

What is hard about this, and what would change our view?

Frequently asked questions

Conclusion

The problem is making a large network of independent agents productive. These agents are not employees. A distributor cannot set their hours or require their time. Recruiting adds agents to the network, but it does not make them write business. Our reading is that recruiting does not solve activation.

Start with the terms. Brokers Alliance, an IMO, FMO and BGA, calls IMO, FMO, BGA and MGA "trade labels, not regulatory categories." Ritter Insurance Marketing, an FMO, says no set standard defines an FMO. One may work with more than 10,000 agents and another with 10. We use IMO and FMO for any such distributor, whether you call it an insurance FMO or an IMO.

We describe the economics in three steps. Recruit means contracting and appointing an agent. Activate means the agent starts writing business that issues. Retain means the agent stays and keeps writing. "Activate" is our word. The sources we opened use other terms.

Picture a network of a thousand agents. That is an illustration, not a statistic about any real organization. How many of them write business, and how soon, decide what that network is worth.

Our reading is that incentives pull distributors toward recruiting first. Three sourced facts sit behind it. The conclusion is ours.

Ritter says agents who sign contracts give the FMO a wider network, which improves its standing with the carrier. LIMRA reports that more than 8 in 10 surveyed BGAs and IMOs name expanding their network as a top priority, alongside selling more of their current products. Brokers Alliance says an IMO is paid by carriers on business that issues. It also says many carriers allow an agent's appointment to move after a period with no new business, and the length varies by carrier.

Our reading: network size is easy to count and easy to show a carrier. Activation is harder to count. An agent who is contracted but silent adds to the first number and earns the IMO nothing, because no business issues.

The evidence has limits. No source says distributors neglect activation. The LIMRA survey asks about priorities, not results. We are reasoning from incentives, not reporting a measured finding.

We found none. We cannot say none exists anywhere. We can say what we checked on October 6, 2026.

Web searches. We searched for IMO and FMO activation rates, and for the share of contracted agents who never submit a policy. We found guides for agents choosing an organization and posts from lead vendors.

LIMRA public pages. We opened the Inside the Intermediary 4.0 abstract and the March 2025 release. They describe a survey of more than 60 BGAs and IMOs in early fall 2024 and report priorities, investments and growth. Neither reports an activation rate. LIMRA says no part of its reports may be reproduced without written permission. We did not review the full reports or use their figures.

A state regulator form. The Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance Insurance Producers Report (form MO 375-0110, 2023 edition) asks insurers for producers licensed, appointed, terminated and renewed. It does not ask how many wrote business.

An IMO and FMO playbook. Financialize's 2026 playbook for IMO and FMO leaders, dated June 18, 2026, lists seven productivity metrics. None is activation, and none has a benchmark. Financialize also sells leads.

If you see an activation figure quoted, ask four things: who published it, how it defines "active," how many organizations it covers, and when.

Our reading is that traditional FMO training depends on time that agents control and the distributor does not. Webinars, live events and manager calls need the agent to show up. An agent who is not yet writing has the least reason to.

Three sourced facts add pressure. Ritter says agents can work with as many FMOs as they like, so training competes for an agent's attention. Brokers Alliance calls product training close to table stakes and says carriers offer much of it free. Financialize says one afternoon webinar is not enough for today's products.

There is also a legal wrinkle. An IRS training presentation (opened October 6, 2026, and not official guidance, by its own note) says training on how to do the job is "strong evidence the worker's an employee." Our reading: a distributor may hesitate to make training mandatory for agents it treats as independent. That is a tax test, not an insurance rule. Ask counsel before requiring anything.

Our reading is that scaled practice changes two things. An agent can practice without another person present. And the distributor gets a record of that practice. Neither is a measured result.

Eubrics builds AI sales roleplay software. Its roleplay bots simulate real customers, set up for a team's product, ideal customer profile, pricing and market. Eubrics also scores real customer calls after they happen, builds coaching plans, and tracks certification and competency. See how this works for insurance sales teams and across AI sales training software.

We have not published results from an independent, non-employee agent network, and this article uses none. Whether a distributor can use these tools with its agents depends on its contracts and how its agents take calls.

For a network, the point is simple. Practice does not need a manager's calendar. A scored attempt leaves a record even when no one watches the agent work.

Start with what you can see. A distributor sees contracting, appointments and sometimes submitted business. It may not see calls, hours or what an agent does with other organizations.

Ritter says an agent can contract directly with the carrier through the FMO, or contract with the FMO to sell a carrier's plans. It says the two forms differ in how agents get paid and what happens if the agent leaves. Our reading: what a distributor can see depends on which form it holds.

Our reading is also that production alone arrives late. A new agent and a silent agent look the same until the first case issues. So a distributor should ask:

• How do we define an active agent, in writing? We found no industry definition, so yours must be stated.

• How long does a new agent take to reach a first issued case, by contracting cohort?

• What signals appear before a first sale, such as practice completed or skill scores?

• What can we observe or require under our agent contracts and carrier data terms? Ask counsel.

• Which agents also work with other organizations, and how does that limit what we can claim?

Four things are hard: evidence, access, control and our own data.

The strongest objection is that activation is mostly about leads, pay and carrier access, not training. Brokers Alliance's list of twelve criteria for choosing an IMO or FMO puts compensation first and training and support tenth. The list is not a ranking, but it points the same way. That objection may be right, especially for experienced producers.

Our answer is narrow. Skills practice differs from product training, and the sources we opened do not measure either one. We have no measured evidence that practice speeds activation. It is our reading.

The other hard parts are practical. Agent data access varies by contract. Agents split their time across organizations. Training may not be something a distributor can require. And Eubrics has no data from an independent agent network.

We would change our view if someone published an activation figure with a definition, sample size and date. We would also change it if a distributor shared measured results on time to a first issued case. We would update this page.

What is an IMO in insurance?

In independent marketing organization insurance, an IMO sits between carriers and independent agents. Financialize describes IMOs and FMOs as intermediaries offering marketing support, training and access to commission levels an agent could not usually negotiate alone. Brokers Alliance adds that no regulator defines the term.

What is the difference between an IMO and an FMO?

Often very little. Brokers Alliance says the two names are used interchangeably in life and annuity distribution. Financialize says FMOs traditionally focused on health and Medicare, while IMOs built their names on life and annuities, and that this line is fading. Brokers Alliance notes that no regulator defines either term.

How do IMOs and FMOs improve agent productivity?

We found no public evidence that measures which methods work. Financialize lists carrier access, compliance support, lead distribution and training as what it sees working, but cites no study. Our reading: define and measure activation first, then test any method, including practice, against it.

How do I train a distributed agent network?

Our reading is that training for independent agents has to work without a manager in the room and leave a record. It must also respect limits on requiring training, so ask counsel. We have no measured evidence on which approach works best for independent networks.

What do the best FMOs do differently?

We found no public evidence that measures it. Financialize describes what it calls leading organizations: integrated services, carrier appointments, compliance support and lead distribution. That is one vendor's view, not a measured comparison, and Financialize sells leads.

Is there a public activation rate for IMOs and FMOs?

We found none on October 6, 2026. The LIMRA public pages and the Missouri producer report we opened do not report one. If you find one, check how it defines "active," the sample size and the date.

Can an IMO or FMO require agents to take training?

That is a legal question, so ask counsel. Our reading is that the IRS treats training on how to do a job as strong evidence of an employee relationship, which may make distributors careful. The IRS material we opened says it is not official guidance.

How can AI roleplay support FMO training?

Our reading is that it lets agents practice without a manager and leaves a scored record. Eubrics builds AI roleplay bots that simulate customers for a team's product, pricing and market. We have not published results from independent agent networks.