Verisk Review - Actuary Verisk Employee Review

4.0
Feb 9, 2015
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Smart People. Easy to find people to make friends with. Great continuing education support. Flex Hours; not often working much more than 40 hour weeks. Easy to access via public trans. Recent push to modernizing company; social media, employee benefits, etc.. but still lacking.

Cons

Typically paid less than others with my job title & experience in the area Lame office work space; cube city, no gym, no daycare, barely free coffee Expensive Parking & bad traffic if you want to drive to work People have been here 40+ years which is nice in some ways, but upward mobility isn't always easy Promotions are too structured/not based on performance enough Considering the large size of the company, poor corporate outreach; though this is improving Not very flexible with working from home. Quality IT support can be hard to come by.

avatar
Verisk Response
11y
Thanks for your input. Our management teams are currently working with the feedback from the employee engagement survey the corporation implemented last autumn. At the top of the list of concerns are the issues around work environment and flexibility. Look for opportunities to make suggestions to your local management team on ways we can enhance the work experience here.

Explore other reviews about Verisk

5.0
Jul 1, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The people are awesome, the culture is strong, and they are terrific career opportunities.

Cons

Getting a little too “doing more with less” happy at the moment

2.0
Jun 30, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The people. I worked with genuinely talented, hardworking colleagues who showed up for each other and for the work, even when leadership made that hard.

Cons

Leadership at the senior level was chaotic and unclear, and it trickled down into everything. Projects routinely landed with little to no notice, leaving teams scrambling instead of planning. Budgets were micromanaged from the top while strategic direction was not — a strange mix of tight control over spending and almost no clarity on priorities. Communication from senior leadership rarely made it down to the people actually doing the work, so teams were often the last to know about decisions that directly affected them. There was also a clear undercurrent of fear among some senior leaders that discouraged any real innovation or experimentation — better to play it safe than propose something new. If you're someone who thrives on clarity, planning, and a culture that rewards new ideas, this is not that environment.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All