Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Dec. 31, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	12. Commitments and Contingencies Leases The Company’s commitments under its leases are described in Note 11. Indemnification Agreements In the normal course of business, the Company may provide indemnification of varying scope and terms to third parties and enters into commitments and guarantees (“Agreements”) under which it may be required to make payments. The duration of these Agreements varies, and in certain cases, is indefinite. Furthermore, many of these Agreements do not limit the Company’s maximum potential payment exposure. In addition, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with members of its board of directors and executive officers that will require the Company, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers. Through December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of such indemnifications. The Company does not believe that the outcome of any claims under indemnification arrangements will have a material effect on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows, and it has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Legal Proceedings and Other Contingencies On February 15, 2019, Sean F. Townsend, a purported holder of the Company’s common stock, filed a civil action in the Supreme Court for the State of New York against the Company, the Company’s chief executive officer, chief financial officer, general counsel, the Company’s directors, and the Company’s underwriters for its IPO, captioned Townsend v. EverQuote, Inc. et al. , Index No. 650997-2019. On February 26, 2019, Mark Townsend, a second purported holder of the Company’s common stock, filed an identical civil action in the Supreme Court for the State of New York against the same defendants, captioned Townsend v. EverQuote, Inc. et al. , Index No. 651177-2019. The plaintiffs alleged claims for violations of Sections 11, 12(a), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, on behalf of a purported class of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s common stock pursuant or traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection with its IPO. Those claims generally challenged as false or misleading certain of the Company’s disclosures about its quote request volume. The plaintiffs sought, on behalf of themselves and the purported class, damages, costs and expenses of litigation, and rescission, disgorgement, or other equitable relief. After filing a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ consolidated amended complaint, the Company participated in a mediation and agreed to pay $4.8 million in settlement of all of plaintiffs’ purported class claims, of which $3.6 million was reimbursed by the Company’s insurance provider. The parties thereafter on February 6, 2020 filed a Stipulation of Settlement settling the litigation in principle, subject to final approval of the Court. On June 11, 2020, the Court entered a final order approving the settlement and terminating the case. The Company was contacted by a representative from a state tax assessor’s office requesting remittance of uncollected sales taxes. The Company does not believe its services are taxable in this state and is investigating this request and intends to vigorously defend this position. If the Company does not prevail in its position, uncollected sales taxes due for the period could amount to approximately $1.5 million, including interest and penalties. The Company has not recorded any liabilities related to this matter as the loss has not been deemed probable. On April 29, 2020, EverQuote was named as a defendant in a putative, statewide (Colorado) class action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado captioned Scott M. Runyon v EverQuote, Inc. The complaint alleged that the Company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by making unsolicited marketing calls to his cellphone and those of other Colorado residents using an automatic telephone dialing system without prior express consent. Plaintiff sought, among other forms of relief, statutory damages of $ 500 to $ 1,500 for each alleged violation and an order enjoining future violations. Plaintiff also asserted an individual claim against the Company for invasion of privacy arising out of the same calls to his cellphone and a claim for unspecified damages. The Company believed Plaintiff’s claims lacked merit. On July 23, 2020, the U.S. District Court granted a stay pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Facebook Inc. v. Duguid, Case No. 19-511. In October 2020 the case was resolved on an individual basis for an immaterial amount, with EverQuote denying any wrongdoing, and was dismissed pursuant to settlement in November 2020. On July 30, 2020, EverQuote was named as a defendant in a putative, nationwide class action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania captioned Carol Scavo v. EverQuote, Inc. The complaint alleged that the Company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending unsolicited text message advertisements to her cellphone and those of other United States residents using an automatic telephone dialing system without prior express consent. Plaintiff sought, among other forms of relief, statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 for each alleged violation and an order enjoining future violations. The Company believed Plaintiff’s claims lacked merit. The case was resolved on an individual basis for an immaterial amount, with EverQuote denying any wrongdoing, and was dismissed pursuant to settlement in October 2020. The Company is from time to time subject to various other legal proceedings and claims, either asserted or unasserted, which arise in the ordinary course of its business. While the outcome of these other claims cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not believe that the outcome of any of these other legal matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.