A landlord in Caldwell, Idaho asked us to price a single-family rental. We shopped it across our landlord markets and three produced quotes worth comparing: Obie at $1,244, Liberty Mutual at $1,264 paid in full, and Steadily at $1,600 in the first year. We recommended Liberty, the middle one, and the reason had almost nothing to do with the premium.
The house
One story, ranch, built 1950, 1,744 square feet, two full bathrooms, one-car attached garage. Crawl space foundation, wood siding, asphalt shingle roof replaced in 2018, gas heat, no air conditioning. Proposed effective date September 21, 2026.
Bedroom count was not shown on the quote documents, so it is not stated here. Nobody verified the square footage, the year built or the roof year against county records or an inspection, so those are what the proposals show rather than confirmed facts about the building.
That level of detail matters because a premium without the property behind it isn’t a comparison, it’s a number.
What the three quotes actually said
| Liberty Mutual | Obie | Steadily | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual premium, paid in full | $1,264 | $1,244 | $1,600 first year |
| Annual premium, standard | $1,360 | $1,244 | $1,574 recurring |
| Annual premium, monthly | $1,384 EFT / $1,432 card | not shown | not shown |
| Dwelling | $306,700 | $298,000 | $344,000 |
| Extended dwelling | 25% | not shown | not shown |
| Other structures | $30,670 | $29,800 | $34,400 |
| Landlord personal property | $9,201 | $5,000 | $3,000 |
| Loss of use / fair rental value | $30,670 | $18,000 | $34,400 |
| Liability | $500,000 | $500,000 occurrence / $1M aggregate | $500,000 |
| Medical payments | $5,000 | $5,000 | $500 person / $25,000 occurrence |
| All-other-perils deductible | $1,000 | $2,500 | $2,500 |
| Wind and hail deductible | $2,500 | $5,960 | not separately listed |
| Water backup | $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 |
| Ordinance or law | 10% | 10% | 10% |
| Roof settlement | 76% payment schedule | not shown | variable by roof age |
| Minimum earned premium | not shown | 25% | not shown |
| Insurer | American Economy Insurance Company | StarStone Specialty Insurance Company | not named on the proposal |
First, a correction to our own homework
Our internal research pack on this account led with a clean line: the two finalists were $20 apart. It’s a good line and it isn’t a fair comparison.
That $20 sets Liberty’s discounted pay-in-full price of $1,264 against Obie’s list price of $1,244. The Obie proposal shows no pay-in-full option and no payment plan at all, so there’s no evidence its $1,244 is a discounted figure.
Compare the same thing on both sides and the gap moves:
- Standard annual against standard annual: Liberty is $116 more
- Liberty on monthly EFT against Obie’s annual: $140 more
- Liberty on monthly credit card against Obie’s annual: $188 more
So the honest version is that Liberty costs between $20 and $188 more depending on how the landlord pays, and the $20 figure holds only if he writes one check up front.
We are publishing the corrected numbers because the recommendation survives them, and because a comparison article that quietly picks its most flattering basis is worth nothing to the person reading it.
The deductible gap is bigger than the premium gap
This is the part that decided it.
Liberty carries a $1,000 all-other-perils deductible and a $2,500 wind and hail deductible. Obie carries $2,500 all-other-perils and $5,960 wind and hail.
That Obie wind figure isn’t a flat amount. It’s 2 percent of the $298,000 dwelling limit, which is why it looks like such an odd number. Percentage deductibles rise every time the dwelling limit rises, so it gets larger at each renewal without anyone choosing to make it larger.
Put it against a single claim. On a wind or hail loss large enough to exceed both deductibles, the difference in what the landlord pays before either policy responds is $3,460. On any other covered loss above $2,500 it is $1,500. On a smaller loss the gap can be the whole claim: a $2,000 hail loss is under Obie’s deductible entirely and pays nothing, while Liberty’s $1,000 deductible leaves $1,000 on the table.
One thing we did not do, and it is the obvious question. We did not ask Obie to re-quote at Liberty’s deductibles. Part of what Liberty’s higher premium buys is that lower deductible, and we cannot tell you how much of it. The honest comparison would price both carriers at the same deductibles and we do not have that number. A landlord weighing two quotes should ask for it before deciding, and so should we.
The widest premium difference between the two is $188 a year, on monthly credit card. On monthly EFT it is $140, and on standard annual terms $116. Set the $3,460 wind deductible gap against the $140 figure and it is worth about 25 years of premium. One hail claim anywhere in that window and the cheaper policy has cost more than the more expensive one.
The cheapest quote is surplus lines
Obie is not an insurance company. It is a licensed insurance brokerage platform, and its own terms describe it as providing brokerage services and acting as broker or agent of record. The Obie proposal identifies StarStone Specialty Insurance Company as the insurer. StarStone Specialty is a surplus lines insurer. It appears on the Surplus Line Association of Idaho’s list of eligible surplus line insurers, NAIC 44776, listed as foreign, meaning United States domiciled but not licensed in Idaho.
Liberty’s proposal identifies American Economy Insurance Company, NAIC 19690, which Liberty Mutual’s own licensing disclosure lists as a member of the Liberty Mutual Group, domiciled in Indiana and licensed in every state except New Jersey. AM Best affirmed its financial strength rating at A (Excellent) effective September 10, 2025, with a stable outlook. One honest qualification on that rating: AM Best marks it with an “r” affiliation code and states the rationale is based on the consolidated financials of Liberty Mutual Holding Company, of which American Economy is a member. It is a group-derived rating, not a standalone assessment of that company.
Here is what the difference means for an Idaho landlord.
The Idaho Insurance Guaranty Association does not cover surplus lines policies. Under Idaho Code section 41-3605 a member insurer is one licensed to transact insurance in the state, and an insolvent insurer is one holding a certificate of authority issued by the director. A surplus lines insurer is neither, so its policies cannot produce a covered claim if the company fails.
Idaho makes the carrier say so on the policy. Idaho Code section 41-1220 prescribes the exact wording, to be stamped in red ink at ten point bold or black ink at twelve point bold, telling the insured the contract is issued by an insurer not licensed by the Idaho Department of Insurance and that there is no coverage provided by the Idaho Insurance Guaranty Association. If you hold a surplus lines policy, that stamp is on it. If it is missing, ask why.
Being on Idaho’s eligible list is a screening, not an endorsement. Idaho Code section 41-1217 says the list does not require the director to determine the actual financial condition of the insurer, and that eligibility indicates only that the insurer appears to be sound financially and to have satisfactory claims practices, with no credible evidence to the contrary.
None of that makes surplus lines a bad answer. It writes risks the admitted market declines, and for a lot of properties it is the only real option. On this rental an admitted carrier was available, competitive, and carried better deductibles, so the trade was easy. On an older building, a vacant one, or one with claims history, it usually isn’t.
The 25 percent minimum earned premium
The Obie quote carries a 25 percent minimum earned premium. The insurer keeps at least $311 of the $1,244 no matter when the policy is cancelled, and the most the landlord could ever get back is $933.
Against a pro rata refund, the break-even is about three months. Cancel in month one and pro rata would have returned roughly $1,140, so the provision costs about $207. Cancel after month three and pro rata governs and the provision costs nothing.
New York’s insurance regulator, in a 2008 opinion about a commercial liability policy, described the purpose as letting the insurer recover the expenses of writing the business if the policy is cancelled. Read the rest of that opinion and the more useful half appears: it says insurers that are not licensed, which is what a surplus lines insurer is, are not subject to the filing standard that requires a minimum earned premium to be justified by actual cost, and that nothing prohibits one as high as 100 percent. That is New York law rather than Idaho law, and it is cited here for the mechanics, not as authority. It matters if the property might be sold, repositioned, or moved to another carrier quickly.
Idaho surplus lines placements also carry a premium tax of 1.5 percent of premium under Idaho Code section 41-1229, plus a stamping fee. IDAPA 18.06.06 does not fix the stamping rate; it says the rate is established by the delegated contractor and approved by the Department, and may be adjusted. The Surplus Line Association of Idaho publishes it at 0.5 percent of taxable premium. The Obie proposal describes its $1,244 as including taxes and fees.
Where Obie is the better policy
Two places, and they belong on the page.
Liability aggregate. Obie shows $500,000 each occurrence with a $1,000,000 annual aggregate, and separately $500,000 for personal and advertising injury. Liberty’s proposal shows $500,000 premises liability with no aggregate stated. On a year with two unrelated liability claims, the structure Obie quoted is the one you would rather have.
Dwelling limit honesty. Obie’s $298,000 is the lowest of the three, which reads like a disadvantage. It may equally be the most conservative reconstruction estimate rather than the least generous one. Nobody on this file adjudicated which of the three estimates is right, and until somebody does, the lowest is not automatically the worst.
Where Liberty is the weakest of the three
The roof.
Liberty’s proposal shows a roof loss settlement type of Coverage A only with a 76 percent payment schedule on the 2018 asphalt roof. That means a covered roof loss is settled at a set percentage of replacement cost rather than at full replacement cost.
The Missouri Department of Insurance, describing a different carrier’s optional wind and hail endorsement, explains the mechanic: for a premium reduction, policyholders limit the claim payment to a percentage of the roof’s replacement cost based on a pre-determined schedule. That is a Missouri filing for another company, offered to show how the mechanic works rather than as a description of Liberty’s endorsement. Under ordinary replacement cost settlement the carrier generally pays actual cash value first and releases the balance once the work is finished. Under a schedule the payout is capped in advance regardless of what the roof actually costs to replace.
All three proposals handle the roof differently and not one of them handles it the way most landlords assume:
- Liberty: 76 percent payment schedule
- Steadily: variable by roof age, with the proposal explicitly cautioning that terms vary by roof age and location
- Obie: not stated on the proposal page
A dwelling written at replacement cost doesn’t mean the roof is written at replacement cost. That’s a separate provision, it’s usually a separate endorsement, and on a rental with a roof of any age it deserves to be read before the price is.
We recommended Liberty with this on the table rather than buried. A known 76 percent schedule on a roof put on in 2018 is a quantifiable limitation. An unstated provision, which is what Obie’s proposal offers, is not quantifiable at all.
Extended dwelling coverage is not a bigger dwelling limit
Liberty’s proposal includes 25 percent extended dwelling coverage on top of the $306,700 limit. The arithmetic is straightforward: 25 percent of $306,700 is $76,675, so the potential dwelling protection is $383,375.
It is worth being precise about what that is, because it isn’t the same as buying $383,375 of dwelling coverage.
Extended replacement cost is conditional, in every form of it we have read. A filed example we can point to, an extended replacement cost endorsement on file with the Nevada Division of Insurance, pays up to 125 percent of the Coverage A limit and requires the insured to insure the dwelling to 100 percent of replacement cost, to accept each annual adjustment in building amounts, and to report value-increasing changes within 90 days. That is one carrier’s form, not Liberty’s, and we have not read Liberty’s. What it shows is the shape of the thing. The conditions live in the policy, not the proposal, and they are worth reading before you rely on the cushion. A higher base limit carries no conditions at all.
One is protection you have to qualify for at the moment of loss. The other is a limit you own outright. Our longer explanation is in extended versus guaranteed replacement cost.
Three carriers, three different opinions about the same house
The dwelling limits came in at $298,000, $306,700 and $344,000. A $46,000 spread on one 1,744 square foot house.
That isn’t carelessness, it’s three reconstruction estimators weighting local labor, materials and construction detail differently from the same inputs. It is also a reason not to read the lowest dwelling limit as the better value. Divided by the 1,744 square feet those come to about $171, $176 and $197 per square foot, which is a figure a landlord can test against what builders in the area actually charge. None of these figures is market value and none is assessed value. If the low estimate is the wrong one, nobody finds out until there’s a rebuild to pay for. How to establish a building’s replacement cost covers how to pressure-test the number.
What this does and does not show
It does show three real quotes on one real Idaho rental in September 2026, and how far apart carriers can land on the same building.
It does not show what landlord insurance costs in Idaho generally, what any of these carriers would charge for a different property, or that any one of them is better than the others as a rule. Pricing and eligibility turn on the property, the location, the replacement cost, the age, the roof, claims history, occupancy and each carrier’s own underwriting.
It does not show whether Liberty’s 76 percent roof payment schedule applies to every peril or only to wind and hail. The proposal does not say, we have not read the endorsement, and the answer could change the recommendation. That is an open question on this file, not a settled one.
These are proposals, not policies. Coverage is governed by the issued policy, its forms, endorsements, exclusions and conditions. Where a proposal did not state a provision, this article says it was not stated rather than assuming it is covered or excluded.
Questions to ask your advisor
- Is this carrier admitted in my state, or is it surplus lines? If surplus lines, show me the stamp.
- What is my wind and hail deductible in dollars, and is it a flat amount or a percentage of the dwelling limit?
- How is a roof loss settled on this policy, and does the answer change with the age of my roof?
- Is there a minimum earned premium, and what do I get back if I cancel in month two?
- Is extended replacement cost included, and what do I have to do to keep it in force?
- What dwelling limit did each carrier come up with, and why are they different?
- What is the premium if I pay in full, and what is it if I pay monthly?
What we recommended and why
Liberty Mutual, on the American Economy paper.
Not because it was cheapest, because it wasn’t. On a like-for-like annual basis it was $116 more than Obie, $140 more on monthly EFT and $188 more on monthly credit card.
It won on the combination: a $1,500 lower all-other-perils deductible, a $3,460 lower wind and hail deductible, higher limits on the dwelling, other structures, landlord personal property and loss of rents, a 25 percent extended dwelling provision the other two did not show, and admitted paper, which carries Idaho guaranty association backing subject to that association’s statutory conditions and limits.
Against that, it has the roof provision, and it’s a real limitation rather than a footnote.
One thing worth saying on an article that recommends the more expensive option. We are an independent agency and we are usually paid a commission by the insurance company when we place or renew coverage. That is true of all three of these markets. If you want the full picture of how we are paid and how we handle commercial relationships, it is on our partnership disclosure page.
This recommendation is specific to this property and these September 2026 quotes. It isn’t a statement that Liberty is better than Obie or Steadily generally, and a different rental would justify a different answer. If you are weighing quotes on an Idaho rental right now, our Idaho landlord insurance page is the place to start, or send us the proposals and we will read them with you.