At-Bay vs
CFC: How Do They Compare for Business Insurance?
Pre-revenue startups can assess CFC’s broader technology package; At-Bay combines technology E&O and cyber coverage in one specialist product.
An Overview of At-Bay and CFC
A pre-revenue software company can face customer obligations before building a revenue history: CFC explicitly includes pre-revenue firms and describes technology, cyber, media and intellectual-property elements, while At-Bay combines technology E&O and cyber. 14 15 2 Choose CFC if you are pre-revenue and need its broader technology package; choose At-Bay if combined technology E&O and cyber fit your software risks.
What Stands Out About At-Bay and CFC?
At-Bay at a Glance
- Combine technology E&O and cyber protection in one policy. 2Product highlights, not an issued policy or universal contract coverage.
- Eligible policyholders get monitoring, training and cyber-advisor access; managed detection and response costs extra. 7Current service descriptions and footnotes; no claims of effectiveness or independent testing.
CFC at a Glance
- Eligible technology businesses can combine E&O, cyber, media/IP and general liability. 15CFC US-facing materials, accessed 16 September 2026; company descriptions, not an issued policy or independent service assessment.
- Cyber policyholders may get threat monitoring, alerts and 24/7 incident support. 20CFC US-facing materials, accessed 16 September 2026; company descriptions, not an issued policy or independent service assessment.
At-Bay vs CFC Coverage Lines Compared
A listing may be arranged through an insurer or partner. “Not listed” means this catalogue has no separate offering recorded; ask the provider whether it can quote the coverage and request the policy terms.
At-Bay and CFC Coverage, Line by Line
Open what At-Bay and CFC each document for one coverage line.
Cyber Insurance
Professional Liability (E&O) Insurance
Tech E&O Insurance
At-Bay and CFC Reliability Scores
Each score uses the rubric for that provider’s documented role. Providers with more than one role may have a score for each.
At-Bay Reliability Scores
CFC Reliability Scores
No Reliability Score
At-Bay and CFC Review Scores for 2026
These averages can combine ratings for different products, locations, and customer groups, including approximate BBB grade conversions. Read each review for the sources, scope, and calculation.
At-Bay Review Score
2 rated sources
At-Bay’s public review evidence is thin: one old G2 review and a BBB complaint record. It is not enough to judge day-to-day service or claims handling.
Read At-Bay reviewsCFC Review Score
No reviews found
The reviewed sources did not yield customer reviews of CFC; the available survey concerns UK brokers. The one rating we found is from UK brokers: 4.76 out of 5 in Insurance Times’ 2024/25 survey.
Read CFC reviewsKey Differences Between At-Bay and CFC
Intellectual Property Is Not One Coverage Promise
CFC’s technology package includes IP-related language, while it separately markets intellectual-property insurance. The separate product’s scope should not be imported into the technology package. Ask which rights and allegations the quoted form addresses, especially if a customer asks for broad infringement indemnity. At-Bay’s technology description similarly needs supporting wording for the obligation at issue. 15 27 2
California Restrictions Must Stay Attached to Their Product
CFC’s management-liability materials decline California-domiciled businesses and standalone EPL in that program. That restriction is not evidence that all CFC technology coverage is unavailable in California. The reviewed public documentation leaves the technology route unresolved, as it does At-Bay’s current product acceptance. Ask a broker for product-specific confirmation on both sides. 24 17 5
Both Require the Actual Placement Details
CFC’s MGA role and its references to Lloyd’s arrangements do not identify every policy’s insurer. At-Bay’s historical own-paper announcement also cannot settle the current issuer. CFC’s technology application and At-Bay’s platform describe broker-mediated underwriting, so a founder should plan for a completed submission rather than infer automatic acceptance from the audience description. 17 16 11 6
What Should You Confirm in At-Bay and CFC Quotes?
Provide revenue stage, planned launch, contracts and IP obligations. Request the proposed forms, California route, insurer, accepted professional services and any separate IP policy. Compare cyber response services by included tasks and charges, not by an unverified promise of incident outcomes. 20 7
At-Bay vs CFC Services Compared
What each provider documents about the services you may need
42 documents, numbered as cited. Open the sources
Sources for At-Bay vs CFC
Comparisons Related to At-Bay vs CFC
At-Bay publishes cyber, technology E&O and professional-liability routes with security services; AIG lists broader commercial products and broker tools.
CFC describes specialist technology underwriting and cyber-response services through an MGA route; AIG lists broader commercial options submitted through brokers and agents.
At-Bay's technology E&O discusses service-credit claims and separate Stance security services; Alliance Risk reviews technology contracts and existing coverage.
