Practical comparison: Traditional surety bond vs. Credit insurance vs. ZRS

Surety bond, credit insurance, or ZRS? Learn the key differences and discover which one best fits your operations and type of client.

Traditional surety vs. credit insurance vs. ZRS

Traditional surety bond vs. credit insurance vs. ZRS. When a company sells on credit or enters into contracts with financial risk, it needs a way to ensure compliance and protect against default. But with so many options— traditional surety bonds, credit insurance, and ZRS surety bonds —choosing the right one can be confusing.

This article explains their key differences in coverage, cost, speed, and flexibility to help you decide which one best suits your business.

1. Traditional bail: solid legal support, but less flexible

Traditional surety bonds are guarantees issued by an authorized surety company. They are widely accepted by government authorities and large corporations, especially in public works or performance contracts.

Advantages:

• Full legal recognition before public agencies.

• It covers obligations of compliance, advance payment or good quality.

• Builds trust with third parties.

Limitations:

• Slower emission processes.

• Requires financial documentation and counter-guarantees.

• It does not cover consumer credit transactions or individual sales.

• 
  

2. Credit insurance: ideal for large portfolios

Credit insurance protects against the insolvency of multiple clients within a portfolio. It is commonly used by companies with hundreds of buyers or distributors.

Advantages:

• Analyze and monitor the risk of each client.

• Indemnifies against widespread insolvency.

• It usually includes collection services.

Limitations:

• Partial coverage (not always 100%).

• Deductibles and exposure limits.

• Higher costs in high-risk sectors or those with limited track records.

  
  

3. ZRS surety bond: individual, fast and unsecured guarantee

The ZRS surety bond, developed by We Link together with Aserta, was designed for companies that provide loans to individuals. It functions as a personalized financial guarantee: if the client doesn't pay, the insurer pays 100%.

Advantages:

• Agile approval and issuance per operation.

• It does not require physical guarantees or a credit bureau.

• Covers 100% of the guaranteed amount.

• Improves liquidity and funding costs for lending companies.

Limitations:

• Focused on B2C operations (individuals).

• It does not replace credit insurance for large business portfolios.

4. Quick comparison

Feature	Traditional bail	Credit insurance	ZRS surety bond
Risk covered	Breach of contract	General insolvency of customers	Individual credit default
Beneficiary	Contracting authority or company	Insured company	Company that grants credit
Coverage	Partial or total depending on the obligation	Partial (subject to deductibles)	100% of the insured amount
Documentation	High	Average	Low
Broadcast time	Days or weeks	Days	Hours
Approximate cost	3% – 4% annually	4% – 6% annually	4% average (depending on the risk of the loan)
Ideal for	Public and private contracts	Large-scale B2B sales	Credits, leases, consumption

Conclusion

The three options have a different place depending on the type of transaction. If you're looking for legal guarantees for public contracts, a traditional surety bond is your ally. If you need to protect a portfolio of business clients, credit insurance is the best option. But if you're looking to guarantee loans or leases for individuals, ZRS offers the flexibility and speed that the modern market demands.

At We Link , we help you analyze your case and design the most appropriate warranty for your business.