Why we rebuilt it
Our entry of 4 September reported the comparison tool published again at ajgmanifest.com/comparison, with figures we described as illustrative. The description was accurate. It was also the problem. Those figures were a few years of anchor values, extended backwards to fill the earlier years, and no club had published them.
On 2 October we decided to rebuild the tool for Gallagher Specialty, under Gallagher's brand, with a view to Gallagher hosting it under its own name. A tool carrying that name could not present a history we had filled in as fact, so the illustrative figures had to go. They are gone.
A site of its own
The P&I club comparison tool, which we are building for Gallagher Specialty and which carries Gallagher's brand, has been live since 3 October at comparison.ajgmanifest.com. It is an independent site. It is kept apart from our platform and carries no name of ours.
It can stand apart because of what it reads. It reads only published figures, holds no client data and no renewal data, and never touches the book. That is also why it opens with no sign-in.
The old address, ajgmanifest.com/comparison, is retired and redirects to the new one. Both links to the tool on our landing page now point there, as does the link in the masthead of this site.
The tool is built to Gallagher's brand guidelines, with their typefaces, colours and logo rules applied on screen. Every page was designed first as a mockup, and each built page is checked against its mockup pixel for pixel at a desktop size of 1440 by 900 and a phone size of 390 by 844.
This is a preview. It runs on a preview host until Gallagher decides where the tool is hosted and how people sign in to it, and the branding still awaits Gallagher's brand review.
The clubs' published figures
On 4 October we replaced the sample figures with the published figures of all 12 International Group clubs for policy years 2020/21 to 2025/26. We read them that day from each club's own annual reports, financial statements and circulars, and from the clubs' announcements of their S&P ratings.
-
The document it was read from
-
The page it sits on, opened a second time to confirm the figure is there
-
A link to the document from the Data page, wherever the club publishes it
Any figure in the tool can be traced to the page it came from
Where a club does not publish a figure, the cell is left blank. We estimated nothing, interpolated nothing and added nothing up across clubs. A blank is less satisfying than a number, but it claims nothing the club did not say.
The clubs do not all report on the same basis. Some have a different year end, some report all lines of business rather than P&I alone, and some figures sit either side of a merger. Those differences are set out club by club under Notes on the figures, so a reader comparing two clubs can see where the comparison is not like for like.
Market averages are calculated from the clubs' own figures. The combined ratio is weighted by premium and the investment return by total assets, in each case over the clubs that publish both, and the tool states how many clubs each average covers. Clubs that publish only owned tonnage are ranked on owned tonnage, and the tool says so.
Every figure was read by hand. Gallagher has not yet agreed them. They should be checked before anyone relies on them, and the tool is information, not advice.
Two clubs that needed more
Two clubs could not be read in the ordinary way.
The Japan Club reports in yen. The tool uses the dollar translation given in the club's own accounts.
The London Club's website refuses automated access, so its accounts were read from Companies House instead. Part of its 2025/26 year comes from a trade press report, and the tool marks it as a secondary source.
The first layout
The first layout of the rebuild was one workspace. The list of clubs ran down the left, stayed in view as the page scrolled, and served as the chart legend, each club's row carrying its chart colour. On a phone the list became a bar fixed to the top of the screen, naming the clubs chosen.
The tool was arranged in 4 views as tabs: Field overview, which ranked all 12 clubs on one metric for one year; Profiles, with one column per club; Metrics, with 11 panels each giving a chart, its figures and its definition; and Business mix, showing shares by region and by vessel type.
Size figures defaulted to an indexed scale, with the first year shown set to 100, so that clubs of very different sizes started from the same point. Ratios and grades stayed as they were. Years were written as policy years, such as 2025/26, which is the market's own convention. Export wrote a CSV with the source beside every figure, and Print printed the current view.
This layout has since been replaced. A later entry records what replaced it.