Ask every vendor the same questions: does the software cover Know Your Customer (KYC), Know Your Business (KYB) and Know Your Supplier (KYS), resolve who owns a business, explain each screening hit and leave the final decision to a person? Score the answers on one checklist, then test each vendor on a real file.
Start with the scope of your own work, not the vendor’s feature list. Software that covers one step well can still leave you rebuilding the rest of the file by hand. Ask whether the tool handles the whole file:
If you need a primer on what the checks are for, read what Know Your Customer (KYC) compliance requires first. This guide is about choosing the tool.
Ask every vendor the same questions and write the answers in the same table. This keeps the comparison fair and shows gaps early. Add your own policy requirements as rows.
| Area | Question to ask | What a good answer includes |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Does it cover Know Your Customer (KYC), Know Your Business (KYB) and Know Your Supplier (KYS) in one workflow? | One record per counterparty, whatever the check is called, with no re-keying between tools. |
| Documents | Which document types does it read, and what does it check for? | A named list of types and checks such as matching names, dates and signatures, with contradictions flagged on arrival. |
| Beneficial ownership | How does it trace a business to the individuals behind it? | An ownership chart built from the documents, with every owner and controller listed and verified, and gaps called out. |
| Screening sources | Which lists and data does it screen, and can it use the providers you already license? | A clear list of sanctions, PEP and adverse media sources, and a stated approach to your existing contracts. |
| Explainability | Can it say why a hit is a match or a false positive? | Reasoning attached to each hit, linked to the source document, list or article. No unexplained scores. |
| Audit trail | What does the record show after approval? | Timestamped comments, overrides and approvals, and a decision summary you can hand to an examiner. |
| Who decides | Does the software approve anyone on its own? | A named person makes every final decision. The tool prepares the file. |
| Configuration | Who changes the policy settings, and how long does it take? | Required documents, thresholds and sign-off rules changed by your team without a services project. |
| Integration | How does it connect to your onboarding, case management or core systems? | Documented interfaces, a realistic timeline and a named owner on each side. |
| Data and security | Where is data stored, who can access it and what independent assurance exists? | Written answers on data residency, access controls and certification status. Treat a certification “in progress” as in progress. |
| Pricing | What is the total cost at your expected volume? | A quote covering platform, per-file or per-check fees, screening data, onboarding and support. |
| Proof | Will the vendor process one of your own files live? | A real file from your backlog, run during the demo, ending in the decision record. |
Most weak files fail at the same two points. The first is ownership. A name on a company registry is not the same as the individual who controls the business, and a screening result on the wrong party tells you little. Ask the vendor to show a multi-layer ownership structure from a real file and ask how it handles one that cannot be resolved.
The second is screening. A hit without context only moves the work to an analyst. Ask the vendor to show a possible match, the evidence for and against it and how the call is recorded. A false positive cleared without a written reason is a question an examiner will ask later.
Ask also whether the tool replaces your screening provider or works above it. Both are valid designs, but they change your contracts, your costs and your history of past decisions.
Software can read, compare and summarize faster than a person. Accountability still sits with a person, and the record has to show it.
Each flag, score and answer links to the document, list or article it came from.
The record shows who approved, held or conditioned the decision, and when.
Overrides, comments and re-screening results are timestamped, not overwritten.
Price. Models vary: a platform subscription, a price per completed file or check, volume tiers and per-seat licences are all common. Ask each vendor to quote the same expected volume, and ask what screening data costs on top.
Integration. Ask who connects the tool to your onboarding flow, how long it takes and what you do in the meantime. A tool that needs a long project before the first file is a cost, whatever the licence fee.
Data and security. Ask where data is stored, who can access it and what independent assurance exists. Get the answers in writing and do not accept a roadmap item as a current control.
Compliable.ai is a compliance decision intelligence platform. Its AI agents read onboarding documents, resolve beneficial ownership, screen every owner and write a defensible decision record for Know Your Customer (KYC), Know Your Business (KYB), Know Your Supplier (KYS) and counterparty due diligence. A person makes every final decision.
Each finding links to its source, the policy is configurable by your team, and the platform sits above the screening and governance systems you already use. Run it against the checklist like any other tool. See Know Your Customer (KYC) compliance software for the detail, or bring a real file to a demo.
There is no single best choice, because the right tool depends on who you onboard, which lists you must screen and how much of the file you need to defend. Start with the questions in this guide, score every vendor against the same checklist and test each one on a real file.
A real file from your own backlog, not a prepared sample. Ask the vendor to process it live, show how ownership was resolved, show each screening hit with its reasoning and produce the decision record an examiner would read.
If you onboard businesses, yes, or at least in one record. A business file needs the same identity checks as an individual plus ownership resolution and screening of every owner. Splitting them across tools means the reasoning ends up in an email thread.
AI changes how the work gets done, not who is accountable. It can read documents and prepare a file faster. A person should still make the final decision, and the software should show the evidence behind it.
Common models are a platform subscription, a price per completed file or check, tiers by volume, and per-seat licences. Ask for the full cost for your expected volume, including screening data fees, onboarding and support, then compare vendors on the same volume.
Not necessarily. Some tools replace screening data, and others sit above the providers you already license. Ask which approach the vendor takes and what it means for your contracts and your existing audit trail.
Bring a real onboarding file. We will process it live and show you each step, from the first document to the decision record.