GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Entertainment EventsTop 10 Best Insurance For Event Services of 2026
Top 10 ranking of Insurance For Event Services providers with coverage, limits, and pricing factors, plus notes for event planners and vendors.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
HUB International Limited
Certificate and policy status tracking tied to event intake and workflow approvals.
Built for fits when event programs need governed insurance operations and predictable document outputs..
ePremium Insurance Agency
Editor pickEvent-specific underwriting intake that drives certificate and coverage requirement updates per event series.
Built for fits when event teams need governed intake-to-certificate operations without custom engineering integration..
Travelers Insurance
Editor pickClaims reporting workflow that centralizes incident intake and required documentation.
Built for fits when event operators need reliable coverage handling and documented claims workflows..
Related reading
Comparison Table
This comparison table evaluates insurance-for-event-services providers across integration depth, including API surface, automation workflows, and the data model used for policy and certificate fields. It also compares admin and governance controls such as RBAC, provisioning paths, and audit log coverage, plus extensibility options for event-specific configuration. The goal is to expose practical tradeoffs that affect throughput, schema fit, and how quickly teams can operationalize coverage for recurring event types.
HUB International Limited
enterprise_vendorInsurance brokerage and risk advisory services that place event-related coverages such as general liability, event cancellation, and specialty lines for entertainment venues and producers.
Certificate and policy status tracking tied to event intake and workflow approvals.
As an insurance for event services provider, HUB International Limited coordinates event-related coverage activities across submission, binding, and document generation workflows. The operational backbone typically includes certificate handling, policy tracking, and exception flows for endorsements. Integration depth is most reliable when event systems can align an event data model to HUB’s intake and status workflow fields. Extensibility is practical through documented connectivity options exposed by the agency stack and its partner integrations.
A concrete tradeoff appears in schema rigidity for teams that want a fully custom data model or fine-grained real-time status streaming. Automation depends on how event details are captured at provisioning time and how much of the downstream lifecycle can be driven from that input. This setup fits situations where event planners already produce structured event attributes and need consistent operational handoffs for certificates and coverage updates.
Admin and governance controls are best when access can be scoped by role across request intake, approval, and document release steps. Audit log coverage supports compliance workflows by retaining a trail of operational actions tied to submissions and changes. Automation and API surface are strongest for teams that treat HUB as a controlled downstream system rather than attempting to mirror every internal workflow state externally.
- +Event coverage workflows map to submission, binding, and certificate handling
- +Operational controls support RBAC-style role scoping across request and release steps
- +Policy and certificate status tracking reduces document drift risk
- +Approval-based governance supports auditable change management
- –Automation depth depends on how event fields map into intake schemas
- –Real-time lifecycle streaming is harder when internal workflow states are not externally exposed
- –Custom schema requirements may increase provisioning and change-control effort
- –Integration breadth can lag for highly specialized third-party event tooling
Best for: Fits when event programs need governed insurance operations and predictable document outputs.
More related reading
ePremium Insurance Agency
agencyEvent insurance brokerage service that underwrites and places event and entertainment coverage including general liability and cancellation options for event organizers.
Event-specific underwriting intake that drives certificate and coverage requirement updates per event series.
Event teams get value from a data-driven underwriting intake that maps event attributes like dates, locations, activities, and coverage preferences into the information the agency needs. The operational workflow supports provisioning cycles for certificates and coverage adjustments across event series, where changes are predictable and tracked by internal owners. Admin and governance controls are exercised through agency coordination roles and internal approval steps, which is stronger for small to mid-size teams than for high-throughput, fully automated issuance.
A tradeoff appears when event parameters change late or when many events need certificate issuance at high volume, because throughput depends on the agency intake and internal processing cadence. This fits usage situations where a small team can normalize inputs into a consistent schema and reuse configuration for venue-based recurring programs.
- +Event intake captures structured requirements for underwriting and certificate issuance workflows.
- +Handles event series changes through repeatable operational provisioning cycles.
- +Better control when internal teams standardize event data and approval steps.
- –Limited visibility into API, automation, and data model for direct integration.
- –High-volume certificate issuance may bottleneck on intake and coordination cycles.
Best for: Fits when event teams need governed intake-to-certificate operations without custom engineering integration.
Travelers Insurance
enterprise_vendorDirect commercial underwriting and broker-channel support for event-related insurance such as general liability, property, and specialty coverage needs tied to entertainment operations.
Claims reporting workflow that centralizes incident intake and required documentation.
This provider is oriented toward insurance lifecycle execution, including policy handling touchpoints, event-related document capture, and claims reporting processes that keep downstream steps predictable. Event teams gain value when they can align attendee and trip metadata to the insurer’s required forms and support flows. Governance control is strongest when internal teams can assign ownership for policy requests and incident reporting using clear operational procedures. Integration depth matters most for organizations that must provision many event-bound policies and track status across the request lifecycle.
A concrete tradeoff appears when API automation for policy issuance, coverage confirmation, and structured status callbacks is not available or not sufficient for high-throughput orchestration. In that situation, event administrators handle provisioning manually and rely on email and ticketing workflows for coordination. This fits scenarios with moderate event volume, where throughput is capped by human review and document preparation rather than by automated provisioning.
- +Claims handling path is structured for incident workflows and documentation consistency
- +Event policy coordination supports date and participant detail collection
- +Customer support channels reduce downtime during coverage questions and reporting
- –Automation and API surface for provisioning may be limited for end-to-end integration
- –Status visibility can require manual coordination across policy request lifecycles
Best for: Fits when event operators need reliable coverage handling and documented claims workflows.
Chubb
enterprise_vendorSpecialty underwriting and broker support for entertainment event exposures that include liability and ancillary coverages for high-risk event operations.
Endorsement processing that preserves change history across policy modifications
Chubb provides event insurance services through an underwriting workflow that treats risk details as structured submission data. Integration depth is strongest when brokers and insurers use established submission channels and document exchange instead of direct in-product provisioning.
Automation and an API surface are less visible for external systems than for internal workflow tooling, which limits turnkey schema-driven ingestion. Governance and controls are handled via underwriting, endorsement processing, and policy administration steps that support auditability through maintained records and change trails.
- +Underwriting and policy issuance follow a documented, structured submission workflow
- +Endorsement and change handling supports controlled policy administration
- +Broker-facing operations reduce integration friction for event risk intake
- –External automation and API surface for event provisioning is not clearly productized
- –Event risk data model mapping can require broker mediation and custom document packaging
- –Admin and RBAC controls for customer systems are not exposed as self-serve configuration
Best for: Fits when brokers need consistent submissions and policy administration for recurring event coverage.
Nationwide
enterprise_vendorCommercial insurance underwriting and broker-channel placement for event-related coverages used by entertainment venues and producers.
Endorsement-driven policy lifecycle management tied to underwriting and agent servicing workflows.
Nationwide provides insurance coverage sourcing and policy administration through carrier operations for event services. The primary distinctiveness is carrier-level underwriting alignment with established risk data flows, not custom event microservices.
Integration depth typically centers on agent and policy records workflows, so API automation and extensibility are constrained compared with event-specific platforms. Admin governance is oriented around policy lifecycle controls, with auditability tied to internal carrier and agent processes rather than a developer-facing automation surface.
- +Carrier-native policy lifecycle workflows tied to underwriting records
- +Event coverage decisions align to standardized risk documentation practices
- +Policy administration supports established endorsement and claims operations
- +Governance follows carrier underwriting and policy control requirements
- –Limited visibility into a developer-facing API and automation surface
- –Data model extensibility for event-specific schemas appears constrained
- –Provisioning and configuration controls are not clearly exposed for integrations
- –RBAC and audit log details are not presented as integration primitives
Best for: Fits when event operators need carrier-backed policy administration over deep API-driven automation.
CNA
enterprise_vendorCommercial insurance underwriting for event and entertainment exposures delivered through broker partners for liability and related specialty coverage.
Event-certificate and endorsement workflow tied to underwriting data schema for controlled issuance.
CNA fits event operations teams that need insurer-backed issuance with strong integration and governance controls. The service centers on policy issuance workflows, event risk data capture, and document handling tied to an event schedule.
Integration depth is most credible when systems can map to CNA’s underwriting and certificate data model for provisioning and renewal actions. Automation and API surface matter for high throughput, since approvals, endorsements, and certificate generation must stay consistent across events and stakeholders.
- +Insurance issuance workflows align to event schedules and required certificate artifacts
- +Document generation supports consistent event-by-event compliance outputs
- +Underwriting data requirements map to a structured risk data model
- +Extensibility is stronger when integrations can follow CNA schema conventions
- +Governance improves when role-based access restricts certificate and endorsement actions
- +Audit trails typically support review of issuance and change history
- –API automation depth depends on available integration endpoints for event events
- –Data model mapping can be complex when event risk fields differ by venue
- –Certificate and endorsement workflows may require manual review gates in practice
- –Sandbox and test tooling coverage can limit safe automation iteration
- –RBAC granularity may not match custom event stakeholder workflows
Best for: Fits when event teams need governed issuance, auditable changes, and integration with structured risk data.
Liberty Mutual Insurance
enterprise_vendorCommercial underwriting and claims handling support for event-related liabilities used by entertainment venues and event organizers through broker networks.
Endorsement and servicing workflows for updating coverage after event underwriting changes
Liberty Mutual Insurance provides policy and claims workflows that can integrate event-related risk via insurer-managed servicing and third-party channels, but it rarely exposes a developer-grade automation and API surface for external systems. The service focus centers on underwriting inputs, endorsement changes, and claims adjudication paths that map to an insurer data model instead of an event vendor schema.
Integration depth tends to be handled through case-based provisioning and internal routing rather than an event automation data model with explicit schemas, RBAC, and audit logs for customers. Admin and governance controls are geared toward policy management outcomes, with limited public detail on RBAC granularity, audit-log export, and automated provisioning at external throughput.
- +Insurance servicing handles policy changes tied to event risk
- +Claims workflow supports documented investigation and adjudication stages
- +Underwriting collects structured inputs for risk evaluation
- –Public information on external event APIs and automation is limited
- –Customer-facing schema and data model for integrations is not clearly documented
- –RBAC and audit-log export for third-party automation is not specified
Best for: Fits when event operations need carrier-backed coverage changes and claims support over direct API automation.
Event Insure
specialistEvent Insure arranges event insurance policies for organizers and venues, including general liability and event-specific coverages for entertainment events.
Underwriting-ready event and risk documentation workflow for coverage requests.
Event Insure targets event insurance workflows with a provider-side service layer that connects coverage needs to operational execution. Integration depth shows up through its event and risk data capture and the way that coverage requests map to actionable underwriting inputs.
Automation and extensibility are limited to the service workflow it offers rather than a broad developer-first API surface. Admin and governance controls focus on managing request handling and documentation rather than granular RBAC and programmable audit events.
- +Event and risk data capture structured for underwriting review inputs
- +Service-led workflow reduces handoffs between organizers and coverage processing
- +Document handling supports evidence attachment during claims and audits
- +Configuration options align with common event coverage patterns
- –Developer API surface appears narrow compared with automation-first competitors
- –Data model extensibility is constrained to the service workflow
- –RBAC granularity and permissions modeling are not clearly exposed
- –Audit logging and event export formats are not described at schema level
Best for: Fits when event teams need insurance processing with guided operations, not deep developer integrations.
CoverWallet
specialistCoverWallet matches event organizers and venues with commercial insurance carriers for event general liability and related coverages through a managed brokerage workflow.
Event-focused underwriting submission that ties event details to coverage selection and servicing workflow.
CoverWallet provides event insurance procurement and policy administration workflows for event-focused operators. The service centers on an insurance data model tied to event attributes like dates, locations, activities, and vendors.
Integration depth is driven by underwriting submission workflows that many teams operationalize through forms, document capture, and insurer routing. Automation and control depend on configuration of coverage inputs and governance through admin permissioning and audit trails for policy and claim lifecycle actions.
- +Event-specific underwriting inputs mapped to a structured insurance data model
- +Policy lifecycle administration supports document collection and insurer submissions
- +Admin permissioning supports RBAC-style separation for operations and servicing
- +Audit log visibility supports governance across policy changes and claim handling
- –Automation is workflow-driven more than API-first for custom systems integration
- –Schema extensibility is constrained by the event attributes supported in submission
- –Throughput depends on manual steps for documentation validation and rework
Best for: Fits when event operators need managed coverage workflows and controlled policy administration.
How to Choose the Right Insurance For Event Services
This buyer's guide covers event insurance for organizers and venues using providers like HUB International Limited, ePremium Insurance Agency, Travelers Insurance, Chubb, and CNA. It also addresses how Nationwide, Liberty Mutual Insurance, Event Insure, and CoverWallet handle certificate issuance, endorsement changes, and event risk documentation workflows.
The guide focuses on integration depth, data model fit, automation and API surface, and admin and governance controls across these providers. Each section maps buyer questions to concrete mechanisms like certificate status tracking, endorsement change history, and RBAC-style role scoping.
Event insurance placement and administration built around event schedules, certificates, and endorsements
Insurance For Event Services connects event risk inputs like dates, venues, activities, and vendors to underwriting intake, policy issuance, and certificate output for specific events. The operational problem it solves is document drift during certificate generation, because certificate and policy status must stay aligned with event intake and change approvals.
Providers like HUB International Limited and CNA treat event risk details as structured inputs tied to certificate artifacts and controlled endorsement processing. Brokerage and insurer channels also support claims workflows, and Travelers Insurance centralizes incident intake and required documentation through its claims reporting workflow.
Integration, automation, and governance signals for event insurance workflows
Event insurance becomes hard to run at scale when event fields do not map cleanly into a provider’s intake schemas and provisioning steps. The most decisive evaluation signals are how event data becomes policy decisions and how certificate status and endorsements stay consistent.
Integration breadth matters when specialized event tooling must feed requirements. Admin and governance controls matter when multiple stakeholders must request, approve, and release certificate changes without losing audit-ready records.
Event intake to certificate and policy status tracking
HUB International Limited connects certificate and policy status tracking to event intake and workflow approvals, which reduces document drift risk when events change. CoverWallet also ties an event-focused underwriting submission to a structured insurance data model that supports policy lifecycle administration.
Endorsement and change history preservation across policy modifications
Chubb preserves change history through endorsement processing, which helps track what changed between event coverage versions. Nationwide manages endorsement-driven policy lifecycle steps tied to underwriting and agent servicing workflows.
Structured underwriting intake driven by event series and repeatable requirements
ePremium Insurance Agency uses event-specific underwriting intake that drives certificate and coverage requirement updates per event series. Event Insure provides underwriting-ready event and risk documentation workflows that map coverage requests to underwriting review inputs.
API surface and automation depth tied to event schema mapping
CNA offers stronger integration credibility when systems map to CNA’s structured underwriting and certificate data model for provisioning and renewal actions. Providers like ePremium Insurance Agency and Nationwide have limited visibility into API and automation for direct integration, which shifts work toward governed internal workflows or carrier and agent processes.
Admin governance controls using RBAC-style role scoping and approval gates
HUB International Limited supports RBAC-aligned access across request and release steps and uses approval-based governance for auditable change management. CNA improves governance when role-based access restricts certificate and endorsement actions, and CoverWallet supports admin permissioning that mirrors RBAC-style separation for operations and servicing.
Audit-ready operational records and exportable change traceability
HUB International Limited is built around workflow approvals and audit-ready operational records tied to certificate and policy status. CoverWallet includes audit log visibility for governance across policy and claim lifecycle actions, while Chubb focuses on endorsement and change trails that preserve a policy modification history.
Match event data governance to provider workflow mechanics before committing to automation
Selection should start with where event fields originate and how they must flow into underwriting intake, certificate issuance, and endorsement processing. HUB International Limited and CNA are strong fits when event systems can map into structured underwriting and certificate artifacts with controlled issuance steps.
Next, confirm how changes propagate when event details shift after requests are submitted. Chubb’s endorsement processing and Nationwide’s endorsement-driven policy lifecycle management both center on change history, while Travelers Insurance and Liberty Mutual Insurance center more on claims and servicing paths than on developer-grade orchestration.
Define the event data schema that must drive underwriting and certificates
List the required fields that change outcomes like venue, dates, activities, vendors, and attendee or participant detail, because CNA and HUB International Limited align with underwriting and certificate data model inputs for controlled issuance. If event series changes must update requirements repeatedly, ePremium Insurance Agency supports repeatable operational provisioning cycles driven by event intake.
Verify certificate and policy status can be tracked through approvals and releases
Ask how certificate and policy status are tied to event intake and workflow approvals, because HUB International Limited explicitly tracks certificate and policy status to reduce document drift risk. For event teams that need governance around policy artifacts, CoverWallet also supports document collection and insurer submissions tied to event attributes.
Check endorsement change history and audit traceability for event revisions
For programs that frequently revise coverage after initial submission, validate whether endorsement processing preserves change trails like Chubb’s endorsement change history. Nationwide also centers endorsement-driven policy lifecycle steps tied to underwriting and agent servicing workflows, which supports auditable lifecycle management.
Assess automation and API requirements against each provider’s integration surface
If direct schema-driven orchestration is required, prioritize CNA when systems can follow CNA schema conventions for provisioning and renewal actions. If integration is constrained, ePremium Insurance Agency and CoverWallet still support governed internal workflows through structured intake and policy lifecycle administration, while Travelers Insurance and Liberty Mutual Insurance lean toward manual coordination across policy request lifecycles.
Map governance roles to the provider’s RBAC-style controls and review gates
Confirm whether role scoping exists across request and release steps, because HUB International Limited supports RBAC-aligned access and approval-based governance. CNA improves governance with role-based access that restricts certificate and endorsement actions, and CoverWallet applies admin permissioning for operations and servicing separation.
Which teams gain the most from event insurance providers built for certificates and endorsements
Teams need event insurance providers that can operationalize changes across event schedules, certificates, and endorsements without losing audit clarity. The best fit depends on whether automation is required and whether event details are standardized enough for repeatable underwriting intake.
The audience splits below reflect the provider-specific best-for scenarios, including governed intake-to-certificate operations, structured claims incident workflows, and endorsement-driven lifecycle management.
Event operations teams that standardize event data and need governed intake to certificate output
HUB International Limited fits teams that need certificate and policy status tracking tied to event intake and workflow approvals. ePremium Insurance Agency fits teams that can standardize internal event data and handle event series changes through repeatable operational provisioning cycles.
Brokers and recurring program managers that require consistent submissions and controlled endorsement processing
Chubb fits broker operations that rely on structured submission workflows and need endorsement and change handling with preserved change history. Nationwide fits teams that need carrier-backed endorsement-driven policy lifecycle management tied to underwriting and agent servicing.
Event producers and venues that prioritize incident documentation and claims workflow clarity
Travelers Insurance fits operators that need a structured claims reporting workflow that centralizes incident intake and required documentation. Liberty Mutual Insurance fits teams that need insurer-managed servicing and documented claims adjudication stages when direct API automation is not the primary requirement.
Event teams that must integrate structured risk fields into underwriting and certificate issuance with audit controls
CNA fits when event systems can map to CNA’s structured underwriting and certificate data model for controlled issuance and auditable changes. This fit strengthens when teams require role-based access restrictions for certificate and endorsement actions.
Organizations that want guided event insurance processing with structured underwriting-ready documentation
Event Insure fits event teams that need underwriting-ready event and risk documentation workflows and service-led execution. CoverWallet fits teams that want managed brokerage workflows tied to event attributes like dates, locations, activities, and vendors with audit log visibility.
Failure modes that break event insurance workflows across underwriting, certificates, and endorsements
Event insurance workflows break when a provider’s intake schema and change mechanics do not match how events are actually planned and revised. Several reviewed providers show recurring constraints around API visibility, data model extensibility, and how much of the lifecycle can be governed through automation.
These pitfalls are fixable by checking how certificate status tracking, endorsement history, and RBAC-style controls behave before operationalizing high-throughput event issuance.
Assuming API-first orchestration exists for event schema mapping
If direct automation is required, validate CNA for structured risk data model mapping and certificate artifacts rather than assuming endpoint coverage exists for every lifecycle step. If integration depth is limited, teams should plan for workflow-driven provisioning like CoverWallet and Event Insure, and avoid expecting Travelers Insurance and Liberty Mutual Insurance to provide developer-grade orchestration for external systems.
Ignoring certificate and policy status drift during event changes
Teams that revise event details after initial submission need certificate and policy status tracking tied to event intake and workflow approvals, which HUB International Limited provides directly. Without this linkage, organizations risk manual coordination across policy request lifecycles in workflows like Travelers Insurance.
Underestimating endorsement change history requirements for audit and stakeholder coordination
For programs that frequently update coverage, require endorsement processing that preserves change history like Chubb and endorsement-driven lifecycle management like Nationwide. Where endorsements and certificate generation require manual review gates, as described for CNA in practice, operational throughput planning must include review capacity.
Selecting a provider with RBAC granularity that cannot match internal stakeholder roles
If operations requires fine-grained role scoping across request and release steps, HUB International Limited’s RBAC-aligned access and approval gates are built to match that workflow. For setups with complex stakeholder workflows, CNA RBAC granularity may not match custom structures, and CoverWallet emphasizes admin permissioning and audit logs rather than exposing every programmable governance control.
Over-customizing event schemas without checking extensibility and provisioning control cost
Teams requesting custom schema requirements should account for increased provisioning and change-control effort, which is a stated constraint for HUB International Limited. For providers that constrain schema extensibility to event attributes, like CoverWallet, adapt the internal data model to fit rather than forcing custom fields into the submission workflow.
How We Selected and Ranked These Providers
We evaluated HUB International Limited, ePremium Insurance Agency, Travelers Insurance, Chubb, Nationwide, CNA, Liberty Mutual Insurance, Event Insure, and CoverWallet by scoring capabilities, ease of use, and value for event insurance placement workflows. Capabilities carried the most weight at forty percent because certificate issuance, endorsement change handling, and certificate and policy status alignment determine day-to-day operational reliability. Ease of use and value each carried thirty percent because teams still have to execute structured intake, approvals, and document handling consistently.
HUB International Limited stood apart because certificate and policy status tracking ties directly to event intake and workflow approvals, and that specific linkage raised capabilities while also improving ease of use through reduced document drift risk.
Frequently Asked Questions About Insurance For Event Services
How do event insurance providers differ in API and integration depth for certificate and policy provisioning workflows?
What integration patterns work best when event teams must generate certificates after changes to dates, venues, or activities?
Which providers offer stronger admin controls for access management and auditability when multiple stakeholders request coverage?
How do underwriting and endorsement workflows affect how quickly event coverage changes can be processed?
What delivery model suits teams that want guided operations instead of direct developer integration to an insurance data model?
How do providers handle claims documentation and operational paths during incidents at an event?
What technical requirements matter most for integrating insurance workflows with event systems that store data in different schemas?
How should teams plan data migration when moving from manual certificate requests to governed insurance workflows?
Which provider fit signals indicate limited extensibility when building custom automation around event coverage?
Conclusion
After evaluating 9 entertainment events, HUB International Limited stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Entertainment Events alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of entertainment events tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare entertainment events tools→FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS
Not on this list? Let’s fix that.
Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.
Apply for a ListingWHAT THIS INCLUDES
Where buyers compare
Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.
Editorial write-up
We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.
On-page brand presence
You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.
Kept up to date
We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.