Financial research concept

Title Insurance Agent Commission Rate

measures the share of agency title premiums paid or retained by title agents, separating gross agency premium growth from the amount economically retained by the underwriter.

By Lee BaileyPublished Sep 28, 2026
Research context

See what supports this page, how current it is, and where comparable or historical context is available.

Research date
Sep 28, 2026Use the dated article and cited sources for the definition, examples, and stated limitations.
Operating-model context
10 connected conceptsPart of the reviewed Title Insurance & Closing Economics; issuer definitions remain distinct where disclosed.
Company examples
2 reviewed companiesRelationships reflect supported examples, not a normalized cross-company KPI ranking.

The title insurance agent commission rate measures how much agency premium is paid or retained by title agents rather than kept by the title insurer.

FNF reported $3.250B of agent premiums and $2.518B of agent commissions in 2025, an explicit commission rate of 77.5%. Net retained agent premiums were $732M, or 22.5%.

Gross agency premium can overstate the retained economics

If agency premiums rise 10% but the commission percentage is unchanged, most of that additional premium is still passed through to agents.

That makes the commission or retention structure essential when comparing agency premiums with direct premiums, where the insurer performs more of the title and closing work itself.

Similar economics can use different accounting labels

First American calls the corresponding expense premiums retained by agents. In 2025 it reported $2.959B of agent premiums and $2.374B of premiums retained by agents.

Those labels should not be silently standardized. The investor task is to identify the share of agency premium that remains with the insurer after agent compensation, then connect that retained amount to overall adjusted pretax margin.

Primary sources: FNF 2025 Form 10-K and First American 2025 Form 10-K.

Part of the Title Insurance & Closing Economics

Connects title-order pipeline and closings with unit revenue, commercial mix, direct-versus-agency distribution, agent retention, claim provisioning, and adjusted title profitability.

Browse the full operating model in Company Analysis →
Where this concept fits
  • Distribution, claims, and segment profitabilityCurrent relationship
    Direct and agency premiums use different operating and distribution models, agent compensation determines how much agency premium is retained, claim-loss provisioning absorbs title risk over long claim durations, and adjusted pretax margin shows the resulting segment profitability after issuer-defined adjustments.
  • Order pipeline, closings, and unit revenue
    Open orders show incoming transaction demand, closed orders show the files that progressed to completion, and fee per file converts completed direct order volume into unit revenue.
  • Commercial mix and transaction value
    Commercial title revenue combines completed transaction volume with revenue per commercial closing, so commercial ARPO helps separate deal-value and mix effects from order-count growth.

See It in Company Research

These companies are examples of how the concept is reported or discussed in public filings. Definitions can differ by issuer; these links open company research rather than a normalized metric comparison.

Continue Research

Continue from the concept into the Grizzly Bulls research surface that best matches the next question. These links are research continuations, not recommendations or required steps.

Compare stocks

Compare title-agent retention

Compare agent compensation or premium retention before treating gross agency premium growth as revenue economically retained by the insurer.

Explore more topics in the Financial Research Encyclopedia.