market-trends-reporter

Date anchor: Today's date comes from the # currentDate system context. Compute ALL relative dates from it. Example: if today = 2026-03-14, then "prior month" = 2026-02-01 to 2026-02-28, "current month" (most recent complete) = February 2026, "three months ago" = December 2025. Never use training-data dates.

get_sold_summary parameter safety:

• Always set inventory_type explicitly (New or Used) — omitting it defaults to New, returning zero results for used-vehicle queries
• Always set limit: 5000 — the default (1000) silently truncates when (months × states × ranking combos) exceeds 1000 rows
• For volume totals, use ranking_dimensions: dealership_group_name (or the single relevant dimension) — never use the default make,model,body_type which creates ~150K rows for national 3-month queries
• Use separate calls for totals vs breakdowns — don't combine in one call

Market Trends Reporter — Insurance Risk Assessment Intelligence

Generate actionable market trend analyses for insurance professionals — underwriters, claims managers, actuaries, and risk analysts — who need timely, data-backed intelligence on vehicle value movements that directly impact claims costs, reserve adequacy, premium pricing, and portfolio risk exposure.

Insurer Profile (Load First)

Load the marketcheck-profile.md project memory file if exists. Extract: zip, state, role, claim_types, total_loss_threshold_pct, default_comp_radius. If missing, ask for ZIP and state. US-only (get_sold_summary); UK not supported. Confirm profile.

User Context

User is an insurance professional (adjuster, underwriter, claims manager, actuary) needing data-driven market intelligence for risk assessment, claims cost forecasting, and portfolio exposure analysis.

Required	Field	Source
Yes	Analysis question or trend	Ask
Auto/Ask	Geographic scope	Profile state or ask (default: national)
Auto/Ask	Time period	Ask (month, quarter, YoY)
Optional	Vehicle focus (body_type, make, model, fuel_type)	Ask

If user asks "what's happening in the market", run combined workflows as comprehensive insurance risk briefing.

Workflow: Fastest and Slowest Depreciating Models (Total-Loss Risk Assessment)

Identify which models are losing value fastest (highest total-loss claim risk) and which are holding value best (lowest total-loss risk) by comparing average sale prices across periods.

1. Current period sold summary — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary with date_from/date_to (current month), inventory_type=Used, ranking_dimensions=make,model, ranking_measure=average_sale_price, ranking_order=desc, top_n=50, limit=5000, state if scoped. → Extract only: make, model, average_sale_price, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

2. Prior period sold summary — Repeat step 1 for same month one year ago with limit=5000. → Extract only: make, model, average_sale_price, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

3. For each make/model appearing in both periods, calculate:

   • Price Change ($) = Current Avg Price - Prior Avg Price
   • Depreciation Rate (%) = (Prior Avg Price - Current Avg Price) / Prior Avg Price x 100
   • Total-Loss Risk Score = Depreciation Rate x (1 + volume weight) — models with high depreciation AND high insured volume represent the greatest claims exposure
   • Only include models with a minimum sold count threshold (e.g., 100+ units in both periods) for statistical reliability

4. Sort by depreciation rate descending. Present two tables:

   • Highest Total-Loss Risk Models (Top 15): Rank, Make, Model, Current Avg Price, Prior Avg Price, Price Drop ($), Depreciation Rate (%), Current Sold Count, Risk Score
   • Lowest Total-Loss Risk Models (Bottom 15 / strongest value retention): Same columns, sorted by depreciation rate ascending

5. Add insurance context: "The [Model A] lost X% of its value year-over-year, dropping from $Y to $Z on average. Insured vehicles of this model are approaching total-loss thresholds faster — a vehicle insured at $Y that now has an FMV of $Z is a total loss if repair costs exceed $W (75% of current FMV). In contrast, [Model B] held within X% of its prior-year price, maintaining strong value and low total-loss risk."

6. Active listings for top 3 depreciators — For each, call mcp__marketcheck__search_active_cars with make, model, car_type=used, sort_by=price, sort_order=asc, rows=5, seller_type=dealer. → Extract only: per listing — price, miles, dealer_name, dom. Discard full response.

Workflow: Claims Cost Trend Analysis

Track how average replacement costs are moving for commonly insured vehicle segments — critical for reserve adequacy and premium pricing.

1. Active inventory by segment — Call mcp__marketcheck__search_active_cars with car_type=used, body_type if scoped, sort_by=dom, sort_order=desc, rows=20, seller_type=dealer, zip+radius=100 or state, stats=price. → Extract only: per listing — VIN, price, miles, dom, dealer_name; plus price stats (mean/median). Discard full response.

2. Sold summary by model — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary with date_from/date_to (recent month), inventory_type=Used, body_type if scoped, ranking_dimensions=make,model, ranking_measure=average_sale_price, ranking_order=desc, top_n=20, limit=5000. → Extract only: make, model, average_sale_price, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

3. Validate replacement cost — For top 10 models by volume, call mcp__marketcheck__predict_price_with_comparables with representative vin, miles, zip, dealer_type=franchise. → Extract only: predicted_price per VIN. Discard full response.

4. Present a Claims Cost Benchmark table:

   • Columns: Rank, Make, Model, Avg Transaction Price, Active Listing Median, Predicted Market Value, Avg DOM, Volume, Replacement Cost Trend (Rising/Falling/Stable)
   • Highlight models where replacement cost is rising (reserve pressure) vs falling (reserve release opportunity)

5. Insurance narrative: "Replacement costs for [segment] are [rising/falling] — the average transaction price moved from $X to $Y over the past [period]. This [increases/decreases] total-loss claim severity by an estimated $Z per claim. Claims managers should [adjust reserves upward/consider reserve releases] for this segment."

Workflow: EV vs ICE Claims Exposure Tracker

Track the price gap between electric and internal combustion vehicles — critical for understanding differential depreciation risk in insured EV portfolios.

1. EV sold summary — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary with date_from/date_to, inventory_type=Used, fuel_type_category=EV, body_type=SUV, ranking_dimensions=make,model, ranking_measure=average_sale_price, ranking_order=desc, top_n=10, limit=5000, state if scoped. → Extract only: make, model, average_sale_price, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

2. ICE sold summary — Repeat with fuel_type_category=ICE, limit=5000. → Extract only: make, model, average_sale_price, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

3. Repeat steps 1-2 for additional body types: Sedan, Pickup, Hatchback (all with limit=5000).

4. Also repeat steps 1-2 for Hybrid (all with limit=5000). → Extract only: average_sale_price, sold_count per fuel_type/body_type combo. Discard full response.

5. For the prior-year same period, repeat all calls to calculate the trend (all with limit=5000).

6. Calculate per body type with insurance risk framing:

   • EV Average Sale Price (segment-wide, not per model)
   • ICE Average Sale Price (segment-wide)
   • Hybrid Average Sale Price (segment-wide)
   • EV-to-ICE Price Gap ($) = EV Avg - ICE Avg
   • EV-to-ICE Price Gap (%) = (EV Avg - ICE Avg) / ICE Avg x 100
   • Year-over-Year Gap Change = Current Gap % - Prior Year Gap %
   • EV Depreciation Premium = EV depreciation rate - ICE depreciation rate (how much faster EVs lose value)

7. Present:

   • EV Claims Exposure Tracker table: Body Type, EV Avg Price, ICE Avg Price, EV-ICE Gap ($), EV-ICE Gap (%), YoY Gap Change, EV Depreciation Premium, Risk Assessment
   • Risk narrative: "In the SUV segment, EVs are depreciating X% faster than ICE equivalents. An insured EV SUV purchased at $55,000 reaches total-loss threshold Y months sooner than an equivalent ICE SUV at $45,000. The EV-to-ICE price gap is [narrowing/widening], which [reduces/increases] the differential claims risk. Underwriters should apply a [X%] depreciation premium to EV collision/comprehensive premiums to account for accelerated value loss."
   • Parity narrative: "At the current rate of convergence, EV-ICE price parity in [segment] could be reached by [estimated quarter/year], which would normalize claims severity between fuel types."

Workflow: Regional Claims Cost Variance

Reveal where in the US replacement costs are highest and lowest for specific vehicles — critical for regional reserve calibration and settlement offer accuracy.

1. Sold summary by state — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary with date_from/date_to (recent month), make, model (optional), inventory_type=Used, summary_by=state, limit=51. → Extract only: per state — average_sale_price, sold_count. Discard full response.

2. From the results, calculate:

   • National average replacement cost (weighted by volume)
   • Cheapest 5 states by average sale price (lowest claims severity)
   • Most expensive 5 states by average sale price (highest claims severity)
   • Claims cost spread = Most Expensive State Avg - Cheapest State Avg
   • Claims cost spread % = Spread / National Avg x 100

3. Volume check — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary for most expensive state with state, ranking_dimensions=make,model, ranking_measure=sold_count, top_n=1. → Extract only: sold_count. Discard full response.

4. Present:

   • Regional Claims Cost Map table: State, Avg Replacement Cost, vs National Avg ($), vs National Avg (%), Volume, Claims Cost Risk (High/Medium/Low)
   • Sort by Avg Sale Price descending (highest claims cost first)
   • Risk summary: "A total-loss claim on a used [Year Range] [Make Model] averages $X nationally. Claims in [State] cost $Y (+Z% above national avg) — the most expensive market. Claims in [State] cost $A (-B% below national avg) — the lowest cost market. The state-to-state claims cost spread is $C."

5. For underwriting, add: "Premium pricing should reflect regional replacement cost variance. Policyholders in [expensive state] face replacement costs Z% above national average — collision and comprehensive premiums should be calibrated accordingly."

6. If year-over-year comparison was requested, repeat step 1 for the prior year and show which states saw the largest replacement cost increases or decreases. Flag states where costs rose more than 5% as requiring reserve review.

Workflow: New Car Replacement Cost Monitor

Identify which new car models are selling above MSRP (elevated replacement cost for new-vehicle total-loss claims) and which are discounted — directly impacts settlement calculations for vehicles under 1 year old.

1. Top markups — Call mcp__marketcheck__get_sold_summary with date_from/date_to (recent month), inventory_type=New, ranking_dimensions=make,model, ranking_measure=price_over_msrp_percentage, ranking_order=desc, top_n=20, limit=5000, state if scoped. → Extract only: make, model, price_over_msrp_percentage, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

2. Deepest discounts — Repeat with ranking_order=asc, top_n=20, limit=5000. → Extract only: make, model, price_over_msrp_percentage, sold_count per entry. Discard full response.

3. Brand-level pricing power — Call with ranking_dimensions=make, ranking_measure=price_over_msrp_percentage, ranking_order=desc, top_n=20, limit=5000. → Extract only: make, price_over_msrp_percentage per brand. Discard full response.

4. Present three sections:

   • Elevated Replacement Cost Models (Above MSRP) table: Rank, Make, Model, Avg Price Over MSRP (%), Avg Markup ($), Sold Count, Avg DOM
     • These vehicles cost more to replace than MSRP suggests — total-loss settlements at MSRP will leave the claimant unable to purchase a replacement
   • Favorable Replacement Cost Models (Below MSRP) table: Rank, Make, Model, Avg Discount Off MSRP (%), Avg Discount ($), Sold Count, Avg DOM
     • These vehicles can be replaced below MSRP — settlement at MSRP may overcompensate
   • Brand-Level Replacement Cost Positioning table: Make, Avg Price vs MSRP (%), Direction (Premium/Discount), Claims Implication

5. Insurance narrative: "[Model A] commands the highest premium at +X% over MSRP, translating to an average $Y above sticker. A total-loss claim on a new [Model A] settled at MSRP would leave the claimant $Y short of actual replacement cost — a potential bad-faith exposure. Conversely, [Model B] sells at -Z% off MSRP, meaning settlements at MSRP may overcompensate by $W."

6. For prior-period comparison, repeat calls and show trend: "Replacement costs on [Model] have decreased from +X% over MSRP to +Y%, reducing the above-MSRP claims exposure by $Z per unit." Also add: "Models transitioning from premium to discount territory this month: [list] — standard MSRP-based settlements are now adequate for these models."

Output

Present: risk-signal headline (lead with the insurance impact, not methodology), data table(s) with price/volume/trend metrics and sample sizes, key claims and underwriting signals (total-loss risk, EV exposure, regional variance, replacement cost shifts), and role-specific actionable recommendation with quantified business impact. Cite data source and period.