Author: Mintel Group Ltd.
Last saved by: HTTP server

Price Comparison Sites in General Insurance - UK - July 2016

OVERVIEW
What you need to know
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The market
PCWs use is so great that concerns have been raised over growth
Companies and brands
Comparethemarket.com is the most widely used comparison site…
Figure 1: Price comparison website usage market share, 2016
…and the biggest spending advertiser in the sector
Figure 2: Above-the-line, online display and direct mail advertising expenditure by price comparison sites, 2011/12-2015/16*
The consumer
Motor insurance is the most searched-for policy on PCWs
Figure 3: Insurance products researched on price comparison websites, May 2016
Figure 4: Insurance products purchased/arranged through a price comparison website, May 2016
Laptops and desktops are the favoured devices for using PCWs
Figure 5: Devices PCW users would feel comfortable using to take various actions, May 2016
Half of PCW users research and buy on the same site
Figure 6: Intended use of price comparison websites, May 2016
Meerkat Movies is top of the incentives
Figure 7: Appeal of incentives of price comparison websites, May 2016
Consumers are split on receiving contact from comparison sites
Figure 8: Attitudes towards price comparison websites, May 2016
People prefer a choice of rewards, while some worry about level of cover
Figure 9: Attitudes towards price comparison sites, May 2016
What we think
ISSUES AND INSIGHTS
Non-financial incentives have the biggest appeal, but choice would be even better
The facts
The implications
PCWs must take care to only contact customers when appropriate
The facts
The implications
Confidence in decision making is high, but PCWs need to promote all information evenly
The facts
The implications
THE MARKET – WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
Aggregators are the first stop in shopping for insurance
PCWs offer support for consumers through Brexit uncertainty
Potential for smaller, niche comparison sites
MARKET DRIVERS
Two thirds have researched insurance on a PCW in the last year…
…but concerns have been raised over growth
Brexit will bring uncertainty, but PCWs could help
Markerstudy’s Go Get site to offer aggregator service to Pet Insurance
Trend for greater competition could see growth in non-insurance aggregator use
Opportunities for more personalised services on the horizon
KEY PLAYERS – WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
Comparethemarket.com is the most widely used comparison site…
…but most PCW users visit more than one site
The big four continue to base marketing activity on major characters
Adspend among PCWs remained high in 2015/16…
…while Comparethemarket.com was the biggest single advertiser
MARKET SHARE
Half of PCW users visited Comparethemarket.com in the last year…
Figure 10: Price comparison website usage market share, 2016
…but the majority use a few different sites
Comparethemarket.com leads among single-site users
Figure 11: Repertoire of price comparison websites used to research or purchase/arrange an insurance product, May 2016
Experience, as well as awareness, is key
COMPETITIVE STRATEGIES
Comparethemarket.com
Commercial information
Recent activity
MoneySuperMarket.com
Commercial information
Recent activity
Confused.com
Commercial information
Recent activity
GoCompare.com
Commercial information
Recent activity
Google
ADVERTISING AND MARKETING ACTIVITY
PCWs maintain heavy spend on advertising
Figure 12: Above-the-line, online display and direct mail advertising expenditure by price comparison sites, 2011/12-2015/16*
Comparethemarket.com is the biggest spending financial aggregator
Figure 13: Above-the-line, online display and direct mail advertising expenditure by selected financial aggregators, 2014-16*
Television dominates comparison adspend
Figure 14: Above-the-line, online display and direct mail advertising expenditure by price comparison sites, by media type, 2012-16*
Nielsen Ad Intel coverage
BRAND RESEARCH
What you need to know
Brand map
Figure 15: Attitudes towards and usage of selected price comparison website brands, May 2016
Key brand metrics
Figure 16: Key metrics for selected price comparison website brands, May 2016
Brand attitudes: PCWs exhibit fairness, trust and good customer service
Figure 17: Attitudes, by price comparison website brand, May 2016
Brand personality: The top advertisers are considered most engaging
Figure 18: Brand personality – Macro image, May 2016
MoneySuperMarket.com is most reliable, while Comparethemarket.com is more progressive
Figure 19: Brand personality – Micro image, May 2016
Brand analysis
Comparethemarket.com is the most trusted and different brand
Figure 20: User profile of Comparethemarket.com, May 2016
MoneySuperMarket.com is seen as a reliable and engaging brand
Figure 21: User profile of MoneySuperMarket.com, May 2016
Uswitch.com isn’t seen to offer anything different, but is highly recommended
Figure 22: User profile of Uswitch.com, May 2016
Confused.com is accessible and fair, but is low on differentiation
Figure 23: User profile of Confused.com, May 2016
GoCompare.com embodies the average comparison site
Figure 24: User profile of GoCompare.com, May 2016
THE CONSUMER – WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
Motor insurance is the most searched-for policy on PCWs
Laptops and desktops are the favoured devices for using PCWs
Half of PCW users research and buy on the same site
Incentives not linked to financial services are most appealing
Consumers are split on receiving contact from comparison sites
People prefer a choice of rewards, while some worry about level of cover
INSURANCE PRODUCT RESEARCH AND PURCHASE ACTIVITY
Two fifths researched motor insurance on a PCW
Figure 25: Insurance products researched on price comparison websites, May 2016
Most PCW researchers went on to make a purchase on the site
Figure 26: Insurance products purchased/arranged through a price comparison website, May 2016
Consumers are most likely to complete purchases for easily-understood products
Figure 27: Conversion ratio, by insurance product, May 2016
One in seven researched four or more products
Figure 28: Repertoire of insurance products researched and purchased on price comparison websites, May 2016
PREFERRED DEVICES FOR RESEARCHING AND PURCHASING THROUGH PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITES
Consumers are much more likely to research and buy on computers than mobile devices…
Figure 29: Devices PCW users would feel comfortable using to take various actions, May 2016
…but young consumers are bucking this trend
Figure 30: Devices PCW users would feel comfortable using to research products on a price comparison website, by age, May 2016
Use of apps is limited in new business
17% don’t feel comfortable contacting a PCW digitally
Figure 31: Devices PCW users would feel comfortable using to take various actions, May 2016
INTENDED USE OF PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITES
Half of PCW users intended to complete a purchase on the site
Figure 32: Intended use of price comparison websites, May 2016
Mobile device users are most likely to intend to buy
Figure 33: Intended use of price comparison websites, by devices consumers would feel comfortable using to research products on a price comparison website, May 2016
PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITE INCENTIVES
Meerkat Movies is top of the incentives
Engaging people with non-financial incentives
Figure 34: Appeal of incentives of price comparison websites, May 2016
Cross-selling is a tough ask
But ultimately the usefulness of PCWs is incentive in itself
ATTITUDES TOWARDS PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITE CONTACT
Consumers are split on allowing PCWs to contact them…
Figure 35: Attitudes towards price comparison websites, May 2016
…but some groups are more receptive than others
Figure 36: Agreement with the statement “I would be happy to be contacted about other financial products offered by price comparison sites”, by age, May 2016
Figure 37: Attitudes towards price comparison sites – CHAID – Tree output, May 2016
PCWs are moving beyond being seen as the speedy option
ATTITUDES TOWARDS PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITES
Choice is the incentive that people really want
Figure 38: Attitudes towards price comparison sites, May 2016
Some still doubt decisions made solely on PCWs…
…and a significant minority prefer brands not on PCWs
APPENDIX – DATA SOURCES, ABBREVIATIONS AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Abbreviations
Consumer research methodology
APPENDIX – CHAID ANALYSIS
Methodology
Figure 39: Attitudes to price comparison sites – CHAID – Tree output, May 2015
Figure 40: Attitudes to price comparison sites – CHAID – Table output, May 2015

This report is supplied in accordance with Mintel's terms and conditions.  
© Mintel Group Ltd.