Insurance companies govern BI reporting for Solvency II by implementing structured version control, formal approval workflows, and complete audit trails across every report and dashboard. This means every change to a BI application must be tracked, reviewed, and approved before it reaches production. The sections below unpack each dimension of that governance challenge in practical detail.

What does Solvency II actually require from BI reporting?

Solvency II requires that all quantitative reporting templates, internal model outputs, and risk dashboards are produced through documented, repeatable, and auditable processes. Insurers must demonstrate that the data feeding regulatory reports is accurate, consistent, and traceable back to its source. BI tools that generate these outputs are therefore subject to the same governance expectations as the underlying data itself.

In practical terms, this means several obligations land directly on BI teams:

  • Reports used for regulatory submissions must reflect approved logic, not work-in-progress versions
  • Any change to a report’s calculations or filters must be documented with a clear rationale
  • Access to sensitive reporting environments must be controlled and logged
  • The relationship between source data and published output must be transparent and reproducible

Solvency II’s Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) requirements add another layer. Internal reports used to justify capital adequacy decisions must be defensible to supervisory authorities. That means the BI environment producing those reports cannot operate as an ungoverned, ad hoc development space.

Why is BI governance so difficult for insurance companies?

BI governance is difficult for insurance companies because their reporting environments are large, complex, and constantly changing. Actuarial models evolve, regulatory requirements are updated, and business units frequently request new dashboards. Managing all of this while keeping a clean, auditable record of what changed, when, and why is a genuine operational challenge.

Several factors compound the difficulty:

  • Multiple platforms in use: Many insurers run Qlik Sense, Power BI, and legacy tools simultaneously, each with its own deployment process
  • Distributed ownership: Different teams own different reports, making it hard to enforce consistent governance standards
  • Manual handoffs: Without automation, moving a report from development to production relies on individual effort, which introduces inconsistency and error
  • Talent constraints: Finding qualified BI professionals who also understand regulatory compliance is genuinely hard

The result is that many insurers end up with BI environments where the production version of a report and the development version are difficult to distinguish, and where changes are made without a formal review process. That gap is exactly what Solvency II auditors look for.


Hi, how are you doing?
Can I ask you something?
Hi! I see you're exploring BI compliance for Solvency II — a challenge many insurance BI teams are actively working through. Which best describes your current situation?
That's exactly where PlatformManager helps most. Insurance teams in your position often struggle with the same core gaps — manual audit trails, ungoverned deployments, and no enforced approval process. Which of these is your biggest pain point right now?
Good thinking — getting ahead of governance gaps is far easier than fixing them under audit pressure. Hundreds of regulated organisations have already done this with PlatformManager. Which area are you most focused on?
Based on what you've shared, it sounds like structured BI governance is a real priority for your team. I can connect you with a specialist who works with insurance organisations on exactly this. Share your details and they'll be in touch to explore how PlatformManager can help — or if you'd prefer to explore first, a free 3-day full-access trial is also available.
Thank you! Your request has been received. Our team will review your details and reach out to discuss your BI governance requirements and how PlatformManager can support your Solvency II compliance. We look forward to speaking with you.
Trusted by 200+ companies and backed by 30+ Qlik partners — you're in good company.

How do insurers maintain an audit trail for report changes?

Insurers maintain an audit trail for report changes by using version control systems that record every modification to a BI application, including who made the change, what was changed, and when. Each version is stored and retrievable, so auditors can compare current production reports against any previous state.

An effective audit trail for Solvency II purposes typically includes:

  1. Version history: A timestamped log of every saved version of each report or dashboard
  2. Change descriptions: Notes or comments attached to each version explaining the reason for the change
  3. Approval records: Documentation showing that a qualified reviewer signed off before a new version went live
  4. Deployment logs: Records confirming which version was published to which environment and when
  5. Data lineage: Visibility into how changes to source data or calculation logic flow through to the final output

Without tooling that captures this automatically, insurers are left reconstructing audit trails manually, which is both time-consuming and unreliable. Supervisory authorities expect the trail to be continuous, not assembled after the fact.

What’s the difference between governance in Qlik Sense and Qlik Cloud for Solvency II?

The key difference is that Qlik Sense (on-premises) gives insurers direct control over their infrastructure and deployment pipeline, while Qlik Cloud introduces a managed environment where governance must be enforced through platform configuration and external tooling rather than server-level controls.

Governance considerations in Qlik Sense on-premises

In an on-premises Qlik Sense deployment, insurers control the servers, the security zones, and the promotion path between development, test, and production environments. This gives BI teams flexibility to build structured workflows, but it also means the governance process is only as good as the controls the team puts in place. Without dedicated ALM tooling, version tracking and approval workflows are often manual.

Governance considerations in Qlik Cloud

Qlik Cloud moves infrastructure management to Qlik’s hosted environment, which simplifies some operational tasks but shifts the governance challenge. Insurers migrating to Qlik Cloud in 2026 need to ensure their deployment workflows, access controls, and audit mechanisms migrate with them. Native Qlik Cloud capabilities handle some of this, but regulated insurers typically need additional controls around version history, approval gates, and cross-environment promotion to meet Solvency II expectations.

In both cases, the underlying governance requirements are identical. Solvency II does not distinguish between cloud and on-premises. The audit trail, access controls, and change management process must be equivalent regardless of where the platform runs.

Which BI governance controls satisfy Solvency II auditors?

The BI governance controls that satisfy Solvency II auditors are those that demonstrate a controlled, documented, and repeatable process for producing regulatory reports. Auditors are not looking for a specific technology. They are looking for evidence that the process is disciplined and that deviations from approved versions are impossible or immediately detectable.

The controls that consistently satisfy regulatory review include:

  • Separation of environments: Development, test, and production are distinct, and promotion between them requires explicit approval
  • Role-based access control: Only authorised users can publish reports to production, and access rights are documented
  • Mandatory approval workflows: No change reaches production without a formal sign-off step from a designated reviewer
  • Immutable version history: Every version of every report is stored and cannot be altered retroactively
  • Change impact analysis: Teams can identify downstream effects before deploying a change, reducing the risk of unintended consequences
  • Lifecycle reporting: A consolidated view of each application’s full history, showing every state it has passed through

How PlatformManager supports Solvency II BI governance

We built PlatformManager specifically to close the governance gaps that leave regulated insurers exposed during audits. Our BI governance solution gives insurance BI teams the controls Solvency II auditors expect, without adding complexity to daily operations. Here is what that looks like in practice:

  • Full version control: Every change to every app is tracked automatically, with a complete lifecycle report showing the full history of each report
  • Enforced approval workflows: Approval steps and testing are required before anything moves to production, so the right version always reaches the right environment
  • Data lineage visibility: Teams can see exactly how changes to logic or source data affect downstream outputs, supporting impact analysis before deployment
  • Cross-platform support: Whether your team works in Qlik Sense, Qlik Cloud, Power BI, or SAP BusinessObjects, we manage governance from a single installation
  • Audit-ready documentation: Every deployment is logged and retrievable, giving auditors the continuous audit trail Solvency II requires

Trusted by more than 200 companies and supported by more than 30 Qlik partners, we help insurance organisations meet their compliance obligations without slowing down their BI teams. If your organisation is preparing for a Solvency II audit or tightening governance ahead of a Qlik Cloud migration, get in touch with us to explore how we can help.