Your institution carries one financial-crime exposure. Why manage it through disconnected systems?
INFERIVA connects the institution's financial-crime operations in one governed environment — from detection and customer risk through investigation, decision, reporting, evidence and improvement.
Not six products sharing a login. One record, one decision trail, one account of what the institution actually did.
CONNECTED OPERATIONS
A corporate customer has traded since March without a single flag. Here is what happens when that changes — and what a supervisor can be shown about it eighteen months later. The same sequence runs for a retail customer, a merchant or an agent; only the scenario differs.
The company is resolved against the registry, ownership unwrapped past the holding structure, directors screened. A risk tier is set on that evidence.
That tier is not a form somebody filled in. It becomes the monitoring threshold this customer is judged against for as long as they bank with you.
Funds move out to four counterparties and return through a related account within the hour. Each leg sits beneath the cash reporting threshold, so nothing individual is remarkable.
The rule that fires is not looking at transactions. It is looking at the shape of the round trip across accounts nobody had linked.
The next transfer is held before it settles. Not queued for review the following morning — held, while somebody looks.
Nobody had to be watching, and nobody had to open a second system to do it. The fraud engine and the AML engine are looking at the same customer, which is the only reason this works.
The analyst opens a case that already contains the March onboarding record, the screening history, and the three related accounts sharing a director with this one.
They spend the morning deciding rather than assembling. That difference is most of what an analyst's day actually is.
The suspicious transaction report drafts from the case that produced it — the transactions, the entities, the analyst's reasoning — in the format the regulator expects.
The acknowledgement is stored against the case. A report you cannot prove you filed is a report you did not file, as far as an examiner is concerned.
The analyst has left. The rules have changed four times. An examiner asks why this case was closed, and against what configuration.
You can show the rule version that fired, what its threshold was set to that week, who approved the close and on what basis. This is the request institutions fail most often — and it is the one every act above was quietly building towards.
WHAT CHANGES FOR LEADERSHIP
Customer, transaction, alert, case and risk context in one place — so the answer to "what is our exposure" is a query rather than a project.
Workflows, approvals, evidence and accountability connected. Every judgement has a name, a time and a reason attached to it.
Understand outcomes, prioritise intervention, and show what changed — against a recorded baseline rather than a recollection.
Nobody replaces a financial-crime estate in one move. The platform is entitled per module, so you can take the one thing that is not working and keep everything that is.
Detection gets the demo. The investigation, the decision and the defence of that decision get the auditor. Investigation is three times the surface of the detection engine here, because that is the honest proportion of where an analyst's day goes.
They sit in different reporting lines and hear about each other late. The agent laundering money on Tuesday is the agent taking scam deposits on Thursday, and treating that as one problem requires one estate rather than two products.
Somebody picked a threshold once and it has not moved since. We derive it — bounded by what the regulator requires you to report, limited by what your team can actually get through, and tested against what falls just underneath it. Until somebody has looked there, a threshold is a guess wearing a suit.
Every platform now offers a compliance score, and almost all of them are marking their own homework. Ours is a separate instrument that runs against anybody's platform. We pointed it at our own first, and it found something.
Detection and cases are what a demo shows. Getting your data in, keeping it traceable, and holding the record together for years is more of this platform than the detection engine is — and it is the part that decides whether year three works as well as month one.
Ingestion · connectors · lineage · quality
Approvals · versions · audit · reconstruction
Tenancy · isolation · onboarding
Entitlement · metering · invoicing
None of this appears in a competitive feature comparison. All of it appears in year two.
Roughly a third of this platform never appears in a product demo: getting data in and keeping it traceable, running tenants without them seeing each other, metering what each uses, and holding the record together for years. Those decisions are difficult to retrofit, which is why they were made at the start.
DESIGNED FOR
Multi-tenant from the first line, with isolation enforced in the database across every table that carries customer data — not in application code that a careless query can sidestep.
DESIGNED FOR
Thresholds resolve from the jurisdiction rather than being written into rules, and filing formats are declared per regulator. Adding a market is a configuration exercise, not a fork.
DESIGNED FOR
Rule versions, threshold sets and configuration parameters are retained as a matter of course, so a decision can be reconstructed against what was actually running at the time.
DESIGNED FOR
Modules are entitled and enforced individually, metered on volume, ingestion, seats and alerts as separate dimensions. The commercial model is built for a wedge, not only for an estate.
DESIGNED FOR
Ingestion, connectors, lineage and quality are first-class rather than a loader script, so a figure in a report leads back to the extract it came from.
DESIGNED FOR
An executive projection for mobile that is deliberately not the analyst workspace, on devices that must be enrolled and approved before they see anything.
Tell us where you operate and what you sell, and we will show you the platform configured the way it would actually run for you.
One of us reads it, not a queue. We come back inside two working days with a time — or a straight answer about whether we are the right fit.