A decision you can't reconstruct is a decision you can't defend.
The single source of truth for fintech risk decisions.
Every vendor signal on one record before the decision fires. Every decision queryable when the examiner asks.
Nothing reconciles. Nothing reconstructs.
Your risk decisions span KYC, KYB, sanctions screening, fraud, and transaction monitoring. None of those vendors line up at the moment you decide, and none rebuild the record when an examiner asks.
OFAC publishes a delta Friday at 4pm. You don't know which of your customers it touches until Monday.
Without continuous public-list ingestion and cross-vendor reconciliation, a Friday delta becomes a Monday cleanup. The wallet flagged by Chainalysis at T minus 30 but never seen by your KYC vendor goes unscreened.
When an examiner asks, the record gets reconstructed by hand.
Evidence lives across vendor consoles and exports, in inconsistent formats, with no consistent integrity controls across them. There is no single AML audit trail to query, so the answer is assembled by hand under deadline.
The decisions that should have triggered a filing, and didn't, aren't anywhere you can find them.
One AML practitioner called the disposition process 'a black box at most shops.' The cases you escalate leave a trail. The far larger set that quietly don't is exactly what an examiner asks for, and exactly what no console keeps.
The status quo: 5 to 15 vendor consoles, 2+ hours to compile evidence for one SAR against a 30-day filing clock, 3 to 4 weeks per sponsor-bank information request. In 2025, crypto AML and CFT penalties reached 927.5 million dollars, most of it failure to reconstruct, not failure to detect.
Better decisions in the moment. Defensible decisions after the fact.
One record, two jobs: sharper decisions while you make them, and a signed answer when the examiner asks later.
One record. Every regulatory shape.
Sponsor banks, crypto-native fintechs, PayFacs, BaaS fintechs, greenfield. One record. Different examiner vocabulary, different framework alignment, different evidence packages.
Your Chainalysis, TRM, KYC, screening, and case-management consoles. One Subject record per customer.
For teams whose analysts alt-tab between Chainalysis and case management, where every SAR takes 2 or more hours.
Chainalysis, TRM, Elliptic on the same Subject
Wallet exposure scores from every chain-analytics vendor land on the same Subject record. When OFAC publishes a delta Friday at 4pm, the cross-vendor picture surfaces within minutes, not on Monday.
SAR drafting from one query
Cross-vendor evidence (TM rule + KYC at onboarding + wallet score + counterparty trail) pulled from the record on one query. Practitioners report two-plus hours per filing today. With FinQub: minutes.
Built for crypto's overlapping exam regimes
On-chain and off-chain decision lineage in one record, mapped to whichever supervisor reviews you: NYDFS, an OCC trust charter, or your state money-transmitter examiners. As stablecoin-issuer rules take shape, the same record answers their look-back questions.
One Subject. Every signal. Forever queryable.
One canonical Subject record on the FinQub graph. Every signal from every vendor that touched it. Every policy version that applied. Every override that fired. One signed export when the examiner asks.
Your tools record their own actions. FinQub records all of them.
Your decisioning and verification tools each keep a log of what they did. None of them hold the whole picture: every vendor signal, every override, every policy version, on one record per customer. FinQub sits beneath the tools you already run, so the record survives any vendor swap and answers the questions your own systems can't. Your accounts stay yours. We never resell signals.
Vendor-agnostic by design.
Your patterns reference a category (KYC, KYB, sanctions), not a specific vendor. Bind Persona today, Sumsub tomorrow. The policy framework doesn't change.
Adding vendors compounds the record.
Every additional vendor feeds another signal onto the Subject record. Your tools make the call with the whole picture, not whichever vendor answered first. More vendors equals sharper decisions, same record.
Examiners see one record across every vendor swap.
Switching off a vendor doesn't reset your audit history. The Subject record persists independent of which vendor sourced any given signal. An examiner three years from now queries one record, not five.
What's inside the record.
The same record, used two ways. At decision time, it sits next to the tools you already use. After the decision, it answers the questions your auditor, examiner, or sponsor bank asks.
Every vendor signal on one record
The tools you already run land on one record, not five separate consoles.
One identity across every vendor
The same customer, recognized as one Subject across every vendor you use.
Public-list deltas on every Subject they touch
OFAC, EU, UN, OFSI deltas land on every Subject they affect, on your record.
Exam packets on one query
A signed, examiner-ready packet for any Subject, produced on one query.
Replay any past decision
See what the outcome would have been at any earlier point, without rebuilding the file by hand.
Every override, with who and why
When someone overrides a decision, the who and the why are captured with it.
New capabilities ship every sprint
Frequently asked questions.
Decide better in the moment. Defend every one of them after.
Every risk decision your team makes today is one someone will question later. The teams that answer instantly didn't work harder. They kept the record.