Why the word "integration" is doing so much work
Filogix Exchange is the rail most of the Canadian broker channel submits through. Almost every platform in this market claims to integrate with it, and almost every one of those claims is technically true.
The claims are not equivalent. In practice "Filogix integration" describes at least four arrangements that behave nothing like each other once your team is inside them all day, and the gap between the weakest and the strongest is the difference between a system of record and a data-entry job with extra steps.
The weakest version is an export you run and import somewhere else. Then a one-way push, automatic but blind to anything your team does downstream. Then two-way sync on a chosen subset of fields, which sounds like the real thing right up to the moment you discover the field your process depends on is not in the subset. Only the fourth version — both directions, broad coverage, and a defined rule for what happens when the same field changes in two places — actually lets people work in either system.
We have written that distinction up in full in what "two-way integration" actually means. It is the single most useful question to put to any vendor in this category, including us.
What we built
Two-way sync across all 1,047 Filogix fields. Change an applicant's date of birth in Mortgage360 and it appears in Filogix in under five seconds. Change a property address in Filogix and it appears in Mortgage360 in under five seconds. The same holds for employment, income, assets and liabilities — every field on the application, not a curated subset of the obvious ones.
Field count is the number vendors like to quote, and on its own it is close to meaningless. What matters is whether the fields YOUR process depends on are covered, which is a question about your workflow rather than about the integration. The reason we quote a total is that it is the honest way to say "all of them" — but the useful test is to bring your own edge cases to a demo and watch them sync.
Conflict resolution is the part that is hard
Any competent team can move a field from A to B. What separates integrations that survive a year from the ones your staff quietly stop trusting is what happens when the same field changes in both systems before the sync runs.
Our resolver takes the most recent change and flags the divergence for review rather than silently discarding one side. Every change carries an audit trail in both directions, with the actor and the timestamp.
That last part matters more than it sounds. Silent overwrites are how a team learns not to trust a sync — not through a dramatic failure, but through someone noticing once that a correction they made had reverted, and thereafter double-checking everything by hand. At which point you own the cost of the integration and none of the benefit.
What this means for how you work
Your underwriting team can keep using Filogix. Your client-facing work — pipeline, follow-up, documents, renewals, compliance — runs on Mortgage360. The data stays consistent between them, and nobody re-keys anything.
That is deliberately a smaller claim than "replace Filogix". Exchange is your lender connectivity and we are not proposing you leave it. What is genuinely in question is Filogix Expert, the surface your team sits in all day, which is a much lower-risk decision than it first appears precisely because the submission rail does not move.
The ownership change, and what it does not change
On 4 August 2026, Dominion Lending Centres Group acquired Filogix from Finastra for $58.5 million. DLC already owned Newton Connectivity, which operates Velocity, so both dominant submission rails now sit under one owner for the first time.
For this integration, that changes nothing operational. Exchange behaves as it did, our sync works as it did, and DLC has said Filogix will run as a standalone subsidiary with operational independence from Newton. We take that at face value.
What it does change is the governance question sitting underneath. The rail is no longer owned by a disinterested enterprise software vendor; it is owned by a broker network that competes for agents with every other network in Canada. That is not an accusation, and it obliges nobody to move. It does make it worth knowing exactly how portable your own data is — which is a question you should have been able to answer anyway. We have written up what was announced and what it left unsaid, including the questions worth putting to us.
What to ask any vendor, us included
- How many fields, in which directions, and at what latency?
- What happens when the same field changes in both systems before a sync?
- Is the resolution logged, and can I see the log?
- Which of MY edge-case fields are covered? Bring three and make them demonstrate it.
- If I leave, what does my data export look like, and what does it cost?
A vendor that has genuinely built this will answer all five without hesitating. A vendor running a nightly export will answer the first one enthusiastically and get vaguer with each subsequent question, which is itself the answer.
See it on a real deal
Book a demo and we will move a real broker's deal across both systems while you watch, using your own edge cases rather than ours.