botminds.aiRequest a demo
WorkflowTrade Finance & Correspondent Banking

Trade Sanctions & Dual-Use Screening

Trade sanctions screening that reads the whole transaction — every party, every bank in the chain, the vessel, each port and each goods line — and cites every decision to the list version it was screened against.

Every party, bank, vessel, port and goods line screened, cited and decided the same day.

See the demoBook a demo
See one case, screen by screen ↓
demo18elementsscreened on one export credit — every party, every bank in the chain, the vessel, each port, each goods line
demo6hitson that transaction: four arrive with a drafted rationale, two need a person's judgment
typical5banking daysto decide a presentation under the credit rules — so a hit that holds one is decided the same day
typical10business daysto report a blocked or rejected transaction, counted from the day of the decision
In short

What is Trade Sanctions & Dual-Use Screening?

Trade sanctions screening is the check a bank runs on a trade transaction before it advises, pays or issues: every party, every bank in the chain, the vessel, its owners, each port, each country and each goods line is screened against sanctions and export-control sources, and each hit is cleared or escalated with a reason. Since 2022 it includes the goods themselves, because fifty six-digit HS codes now sit on a high-priority list agreed by the United States, the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom.

AI use cases in banking: a buyer's guide to agentic AI for bank and credit union operations →

Updated

The problem

Why trade sanctions screening runs out of time

Trade sanctions screening used to be a name check. Since 2022 it is a goods check too: fifty six-digit HS codes now sit on a high-priority list agreed by the United States, the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom, five of them machine-tool codes added in 2024. A single export credit touches eighteen screenable things — the applicant, the beneficiary, every bank in the chain, the vessel, its registered and beneficial owners, each port, each country, and each goods line with its HS code — and the one that matters is usually the goods line nobody classified.

Today those eighteen things are checked in four places. The names go to a screening engine and come back as hits that an analyst opens one at a time, comparing identifiers by eye and closing each one with a free-text note that does not record which list version it was screened against. The goods are read by an examiner and queried by email. The vessel is looked up in a tracking tool in another window, and its ownership chain is pieced together in a spreadsheet to work out whether blocked holders add up to half. None of it can take long: the presentation has five banking days and cannot be extended, and if anything is blocked or rejected the report is due in ten business days. The evidence an examiner later asks for sits across those four systems and an inbox.

typical90–95%of screening hits are commonly reported as false positives, so judgment is spent in the wrong places
typical50HS codeson the high-priority list agreed by the US, the EU, Japan and the UK, five machine-tool codes added in 2024
demo31hourswith no position signal on the carrying vessel in this transaction, against the 10 hours an advisory says to investigate
Where a screened transaction's hours goestimated
By hand10.5 hours
With the solution1.5 hours
  • Pulling the transaction and its documents apart into screenable elements1.5 → 0.1 h
  • Clearing the name hits on parties and banks, one at a time2.5 → 0.4 h
  • Classifying the goods lines, by eye and by email3 → 0.5 h
  • Checking the vessel, its owners and the voyage2 → 0.2 h
  • Writing the rationale, the hold memo and the report1.5 → 0.3 h

Estimated split for one trade transaction with hits, by hand and with the agents; the working solution's own run is 6:14 to 6:20 a.m.

How it works

How one transaction is screened

Seven agents screen every element, gather the identifiers and draft the rationale; a named analyst decides and an officer checks.

What comes in
The transaction and its documents18 elements · parties, banks, vessel, ports, goods lines
Agents at work
Manifest agentevery element, cited to its line
Then
Screening agent8 sources, one version
Ownership agent50 Percent Rule, shown
Then
Classification agententry, confidence, alternatives
Voyage agentcalls and signal gaps
Document agentfive documents compared
Then
Report agentrationale, memo, OFAC report
A person decides
Trade Sanctions Analyst, then the Sanctions Compliance Officerdecides, and checks
What comes out
Every hit decided and cited
The presentation clock held
The examiner's pack, sealed
One case, step by step

One export credit, from eighteen screened elements to a checked hold

Export letter of credit CNB-ELC-26-01733, $1,284,600.00, presented on Tuesday, October 20: twelve CNC milling spindles, forty-eight precision bearings and a lot of tool holders, shipped from Houston to a buyer in Gebze. Corvane National Bank advises and negotiates it for the exporter, and the presentation has five banking days.

  1. 016:14 a.m.

    Everything the transaction touches, on one manifest

    Seven agents

    Straight after the OFAC list update of 6:02 a.m. is applied, the agents break the credit, the invoice, the bill of lading, the packing list and the end-user statement into eighteen elements and screen every one against seven sources. Each line carries one chip — Clear, Hit cleared or Needs you — and the number of sources checked. Six are hits.

    Twelve elements are Clear, four are Hit cleared with a drafted rationale, and two need a person.

  2. 028:52 a.m.

    The queue is ordered by the clock, not by the score

    Imani Oyelaran · Trade Sanctions Analyst

    Forty-seven transactions have an open hit. The queue shows what is holding each one, the clock it is on, the time left and whether the agents have drafted a rationale. CNB-ELC-26-01733 is first, held by a goods line at 0.71 classification confidence, due today.

    Thirty-two hold a presentation, nine hold a payment at cut-off.

  3. 03One action

    The four hits already reasoned about, confirmed together

    Imani Oyelaran

    The issuing bank matched a listed bank in another country at 0.86 on the name alone; country, city, BIC, registration, legal entity identifier and incorporation date all differ. The owner chain, the beneficial owner and the bearings line each carry their own drafted rationale and reason code. She confirms all four in one action, and each one keeps its own reason.

    Confirming records her as the person who decided, with the list version screened against.

  4. 04The line that needs her

    A classification proposal that shows its own doubt

    Classification agent

    Twelve CNC milling spindles, 18,000 rpm, HS 8466.93, high-priority Tier 4.B. The agent proposes ECCN 2B991 at 0.71 confidence — below this bank's 0.80 threshold — quotes the controlling control-list entry, and says exactly where the doubt is: the invoice does not state whether the spindles are specially designed for a machine tool with two or more simultaneously coordinated contouring axes. It lists what it rejected: 2B001.b.2 at 0.18 and EAR99 at 0.11.

    The agent never assigns a license and never acts below its confidence threshold.

  5. 059:08 a.m.

    The specialist reads the datasheet, and a named person approves

    Dr. Liesl Vandermeer · Export Controls Specialist

    The technical datasheet in the presentation gives the spindle as a replacement cartridge for a 3-axis vertical mill, sold as a component and not as part of a machine tool, so 2B001.b.2 does not reach it. Imani approves ECCN 2B991 with the reason code “Classification confirmed from the technical datasheet”. The record keeps the agent's original output, its confidence, its alternatives, the advice and her reason.

    Seven of 214 classification proposals were overridden in thirty days, each with a reason code.

  6. 06The second line

    Thirty-one hours with no position signal

    Voyage agent

    MV Kestrel Dawn loaded at Houston on October 2 and called Algeciras on October 10. Then nothing for thirty-one hours, from October 14 at 18:42 UTC, last seen forty-one nautical miles north-west of Port Said East — where it berthed next. An advisory asks institutions to investigate any outage of ten hours or more. Beside the voyage, the ownership: 27% + 15% = 42% held by blocked persons, below the 50% at which the owner would itself be blocked.

    The agents record the gap and its last known position. They never say why the transponder was off.

  7. 07She asks

    A consignee that appears on one document and nowhere else

    Document agent

    The credit, the commercial invoice, the bill of lading and the packing list all name the buyer in Gebze as consignee. The end-user statement names a different ultimate consignee, in Almaty, and says onward delivery from Gebze is arranged by the buyer. That name is on no other document and nowhere on the credit — and the bearings line had been cleared on the stated end user, so that clearance has no ground left.

    The agent states the difference. The document examiner decides the discrepancy under the credit rules.

  8. 089:18 a.m.

    She holds it, and she cannot approve her own hold

    Imani Oyelaran

    The hold memo is drafted from the evidence on the record and nothing else: the end-user statement, the credit, the bill of lading, the vessel movement record, the registry extract and the control-list entry, six items in all. Her reason code is “end user not established”. Her own decision box tells her plainly that the maker cannot be the checker.

    Nothing is blocked and nothing is rejected: the beneficiary is asked for the ultimate consignee and the end use.

  9. 099:41 a.m.

    A second named person checks it

    Desmond Achebe-Hart · Sanctions Compliance Officer

    He sees the memo, the evidence and the maker, and can approve the hold or return it with a reason. He also writes the ownership risk note the 42% aggregate requires, because it is above the bank's own 40% escalation threshold. Banking day two of five; the decision on the presentation is still due on the twenty-seventh.

    “Prepared by Imani Oyelaran. You are the checker, and you did not prepare it.”

  10. 10On the record

    Who, what, when, why, which evidence, which list version

    The audit trail

    Sixteen rows for this transaction and this desk, people and agents alike, each with its evidence and, for an agent, its model and prompt version. Hits closed without a reason code: none. Decisions without a named person: none. The examiner pack is built from the same rows, carries the list manifest for every version screened against, and is sealed with a hash.

    The download of the pack is itself a row in the trail.

Who it’s for

Built for the people who sign a trade sanctions screening decision.

The same transaction, seen by the five people who carry it — what their morning looked like, and what it looks like now.

IO
Imani OyelaranTrade Sanctions Analyst · clears the day's hits across about forty live transactions
Trade Sanctions Analyst
Before
Opens each hit in a separate system, compares identifiers by eye, and closes it with a note that says “false positive, different entity” — with no record of which list version she screened against.
Now
Opens one transaction and sees all eighteen of its elements with one chip each, four hits already reasoned about and two that need her, each with the identifiers that prove or disprove the match.
DA
Desmond Achebe-HartSanctions Compliance Officer · checks every hold, block, reject, release and report
Sanctions Compliance Officer
Before
Checks decisions reconstructed after the fact from four systems and an inbox, and answers to examiners for a control whose evidence is scattered.
Now
Checks a hold with its memo, its six evidence items, its reason code and its maker on one screen, and signs the ownership risk note the 42% aggregate requires.
LV
Dr. Liesl VandermeerExport Controls Specialist · advises on classification and owns the classification library
Export Controls Specialist
Before
Answers classification questions by email, with the invoice line pasted into the thread and no record of what was considered or rejected.
Now
Is asked with the invoice line, the datasheet passage and the proposed entry attached, and her advice lands on the goods line with her name and the time.
RC
Rowan CastellanosTrade Finance Document Examiner · examines presentations inside five banking days
Trade Finance Document Examiner
Before
Reads five documents in sequence and carries in his head what each one said about the consignee, the route and the end use.
Now
Sees the five documents compared on those four facts, every cell opening its passage, with the one name that appears on a single document marked.
HG
Hollis GraingerInternal Audit · samples closed hits and builds the examiner pack
Internal Audit
Before
Requests evidence from four teams and waits, then reconstructs what was screened against which list version from memory and email.
Now
Reads everything and decides nothing: every decide control is replaced by the reason it is unavailable, and the sealed pack downloads in one click.
Built on the engine

7 agents. Each with one job, and hard limits.

Seven agents screen every element, gather the identifiers and draft the rationale; a named analyst decides and an officer checks.

Manifest agent

Breaks a transaction and its documents into every screenable element — each party, each bank in the chain, the vessel, its owners, each port, each country and each goods line with its HS code — and keeps every element tied to the document and line it came from.

  • Never screens, scores or decides anything
  • Every element cites the document and line it came from
Screening agent

Runs every element against the sanctions and export-control sources at the threshold for its kind, records the version it screened against, gathers the identifiers that prove or disprove each match, and drafts the clearance rationale.

  • Never closes or clears a hit
  • Never changes a matching threshold or a source
Ownership agent

Walks the ownership chain of each party and each vessel owner to the ultimate holders, aggregates every blocked interest for the 50 Percent Rule, and shows the arithmetic with each source.

  • Never concludes blocked status on its own
  • Never hides a chain it could not complete
Classification agent

Proposes an export control classification for each goods description with a confidence, quotes the controlling control-list entry, flags the HS code against the high-priority list, and lists the classifications it rejected and why.

  • Never assigns a license or decides whether one is required
  • Never acts below the confidence threshold — it hands to a named specialist
Voyage agent

Reads vessel movement data for port calls, ship-to-ship transfers, flag and name changes and every period with no position signal of ten hours or more, and draws the voyage as a timeline with each source.

  • Never says why a transponder was off
  • Says plainly when the feed is unavailable and what it used instead
Document agent

Reads the presentation — invoice, bill of lading, packing list, certificate of origin, end-user statement — and compares what each says about consignee, goods, route and end use, citing the passage for every cell.

  • Never decides a discrepancy under the credit rules
  • Never amends a document
Report agent

Drafts the clearance rationale, the hold memo, the blocked or rejected transaction report and the annual blocked-property return, computes every deadline from the rule, and builds the examiner pack under the chosen redaction profile.

  • Never files, submits or sends anything
  • Every draft carries its evidence and the list version screened against
Trade Sanctions Analyst and Sanctions Compliance Officer

Decides, and checks. The agents propose; a named person decides.

Every screen

The working solution, as it ships.

13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.

One transaction, and a manifest of everything it touchesExport letter of credit CNB-ELC-26-01733, $1,284,600.00, presented Tuesday, October 20: 18 elements screened and cited, 6 hits, 2 that need a person, on banking day 2 of 5. Every party, every bank in the chain, the vessel, each port and each goods line is one line with one chip — Clear, Hit cleared or Needs you — and the count of list sources checked.
The queue is ordered by the clock, not by match score47 transactions with an open hit, each showing what is holding it, the clock it is on, the time left and whether the agents have drafted a rationale. CNB-ELC-26-01733 is first, held by a goods line at 0.71 classification confidence, due today. 32 hold a presentation, 9 hold a payment at cut-off, 11 are goods and classification, 13 vessel and ownership.
The line that needs a person opens where it isThe route is clear — Houston, Algeciras, Port Said East, Gebze — and then the goods: 12 CNC milling spindles, 18,000 rpm, HS 8466.93, high-priority Tier 4.B, $1,146,000.00, marked Needs you. The line expands in place with the proposed classification 2B991 at 0.71 confidence, below the bank's 0.80 threshold, and the alternatives the agent rejected beside it.
A classification proposal that shows its own doubtECCN 2B991 at 0.71 confidence, below the 0.80 threshold: “numerical control units for machine tools, and numerically controlled machine tools, n.e.s.” The agent says what the invoice says, what it does not say — whether the spindles are specially designed for a machine tool with two or more simultaneously coordinated contouring axes — and what the datasheet adds. It rejected 2B001.b.2 at 0.18 and EAR99 at 0.11, with a reason for each.
A named person decides, on the specialist's adviceDr. Liesl Vandermeer, Export Controls Specialist, reads the technical datasheet at 9:08 a.m. and confirms 2B991. Imani Oyelaran, Trade Sanctions Analyst, approves it with the reason code “Classification confirmed from the technical datasheet”. The record keeps the agent's original output, its 0.71 confidence, its alternatives, the specialist's advice and her reason.
The voyage, and the thirty-one hours with no signalMV Kestrel Dawn, IMO 9476213, voyage 118E: loaded Houston October 2, called Algeciras October 10, then no position signal for 31 hours from October 14 at 18:42 UTC, last seen 41 nautical miles north-west of Port Said East, before berthing there and arriving Gebze on October 21. Beside it, the ownership: 27% + 15% = 42% held by blocked persons, below the 50% at which the owner would itself be blocked.
Five documents, four facts, and the one that does not agreeThe credit, the commercial invoice, the bill of lading and the packing list all name Tavrel Industrial Makina Sanayi Ltd., Gebze, as consignee. The end-user statement names Oltrek Makine Ticaret Ltd., Almaty, Kazakhstan, as the ultimate consignee and says onward delivery is arranged by the buyer. That name appears on no other document and nowhere on the credit.
She holds it, and she cannot approve her own holdHold of CNB-ELC-26-01733, $1,284,600.00, reason “end user not established”, prepared by Imani Oyelaran at 9:18 a.m. with six evidence items and the list version attached. Her own decision box says so plainly: you prepared this hold, so you cannot approve it; it is with Desmond Achebe-Hart, Sanctions Compliance Officer.
The checker is a different person, and the screen says whyViewing as Desmond Achebe-Hart, Sanctions Compliance Officer: “Prepared by Imani Oyelaran. You are the checker, and you did not prepare it.” He can approve the hold or return it with a reason. The clock beside him: presented October 20, banking day 2 of 5, decision due October 27, and if anything is blocked or rejected, a report to OFAC within 10 business days.
Internal Audit reads everything and decides nothingViewing as Hollis Grainger, Internal Audit: “Deciding is not available to Internal Audit. This role reads everything and exports; it cannot hold, approve, return, clear or release.” The one action left is Download the evidence pack — 9 documents, sealed with a hash, under the internal audit redaction profile — and the download is itself logged.
The report is drafted on the day of the decisionCNB-IMP-26-00841 was rejected on Monday, October 19 for $118,400.00 when the beneficiary matched a listed entry on name, country, date of birth and passport number. The report is drafted under 31 CFR 501.604, the deadline computed as Monday, November 2 — 10 business days — with 7 business days left, and it carries the list version screened against. Beside it, the annual blocked-property return as of June 30, due September 30.
Screening runs against a named version, never “the latest”Eight sources with the version in force and the minute it was applied: the OFAC SDN list 2026-10-22-01 published at 6:02 a.m. and applied at 6:14, re-screening 10,900 open elements, 19 added, 4 removed, 7 amended. The consolidated non-SDN file published at 10:02 a.m. is not yet applied, and the screen says so and offers to apply it.
Who, what, when, why, which evidence, and which list versionSixteen rows for this transaction and this desk: the Screening agent withdrawing the clearance of goods line 2 because the end user is no longer established, Imani holding the transaction at 9:10 a.m., her 2B991 approval over a proposal held at 0.71, and every agent run with its model and prompt version. Hits closed without a reason code: 0. Decisions without a named person: 0.
Governance

Built for strict liability: cited, signed, and on the record for ten years.

Six roles, separated by dutyA Trade Sanctions Analyst clears hits and proposes a hold, a block or a reject. A Sanctions Compliance Officer checks every one of them and cannot check work he prepared. An Export Controls Specialist advises on classification but cannot clear a sanctions hit. A document examiner, a systems administrator and Internal Audit each have their own line, and the screens show the locked action rather than hiding it.
Maker and checker on everything that movesA hold, a block, a reject, a release of a held transaction, a report to the regulator, a matching threshold and an agent version each take two named people. The maker's own screen says so before they try: you prepared this hold, so you cannot approve it.
Every decision carries its reason codeNo hit closes on free text alone. Clearance, escalation, override and return each have their own code set, “other” always needs a reason in words, and the count of hits closed without a reason code is on the screen: none.
The clocks are the rules, and they are watchedFive banking days to decide a presentation; a hit that holds one is decided the same day. Ten business days to report a blocked or rejected transaction, computed from the day of the decision and shown with the business days left. The annual blocked-property return as of June 30 is built from the same records.
Screening runs against a named version, never “the latest”Each source carries the version in force and the minute it was applied, and every hit decision records which one it was screened against. When an update is published and not yet applied, the screen says so and says what that means, rather than leaving it quiet.
The record outlives the transactionWho did what, when, why, on which evidence and against which list version, for people and agents alike, immutable and searchable, with an export pack in examiner, internal audit and correspondent profiles, sealed with a hash. Sanctions records are kept ten years; a financial crime referral never appears on a customer-facing view.
Configuration

Your thresholds and clocks, not ours

What the agents screen against and where they must stop are settings. Each one is a versioned change the administrator proposes and the Sanctions Compliance Officer approves, and the effect on the last thirty days is shown before it is saved.

SettingDefaultChoose from
Party matching threshold0.78Per element kind, tested against the quarterly sample before it changes
Bank and vessel thresholds0.82 and 0.80The vessel threshold moved from 0.82 after four near-matches were missed
Classification confidence0.80Below it, a goods line must go to a named Export Controls Specialist
Ownership aggregate escalation40%Any level; the 50 Percent Rule itself is a rule and cannot be changed
Hit that holds a presentationDecided the same day, by 5:00 p.m.Any cut-off, with escalation at half and three quarters of the clock
Hit that holds a paymentFirst touch within 4 hoursAny number of hours, and always before the payment cut-off
Sanctions record retention10 yearsSet per record type; other trade records default to five
Agent versionsModel and prompt version per agentA change is a new version with an approver; the old one stays readable
Connections

Works with the systems a trade compliance desk already runs on

Trade finance systemcredits, standbys, guarantees, collections and their presentations
Sanctions screening systemelements out, hits back, with the list version on each
Payments hub and messaging gatewaytrade payments, their holds, and the messages behind a credit
Vessel tracking dataport calls, positions, transfers and ownership
Company registryshareholders and ownership chains for the 50 Percent Rule
Regulatory reporting systemblocked and rejected reports, and the annual return
What it changes

The difference, in numbers.

Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.

typical
5banking days
the presentation clock never runs out: a hit that holds it is decided the same day
Decided on day 2
five banking days is the rule
target
1,900of 2,400
hits a month arrive with a drafted rationale to confirm or reject, so judgment goes to the one to three that are real
Drafted for a person
about 2,400 hits a month
target
100%
of hit decisions carry the identifiers, the list version screened against and the person who signed

Numbers tagged “demo” are from the working solution on its own sample data; “typical” numbers are published figures. Sources: ICC UCP 600 article 14(b), a maximum of five banking days following presentation · 31 CFR 501.603 and 501.604, blocked and rejected transaction reports within ten business days and the annual report of blocked property as of June 30, due September 30 · 31 CFR 501.601, sanctions records kept ten years · OFAC Revised Guidance on Entities Owned by Blocked Persons, August 13, 2014, the 50 Percent Rule · 15 CFR Part 774, Supplement No. 1, the Commerce Control List · the Common High Priority Items List, fifty six-digit HS codes agreed with the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom, five machine-tool codes added in February 2024 · the OFAC, State Department and US Coast Guard maritime sanctions advisory of May 14, 2020, which asks institutions to investigate any position-signal outage of ten hours or more. The 90–95% false-positive range is commonly reported by industry and trade sources, not a regulator's figure. The bank, the people, the companies, the vessel and the transaction on this page are characters and records in the working solution; none is real, and nothing here is a compliance promise.

Questions

What trade compliance teams ask us.

What is trade sanctions screening?

Trade sanctions screening is the check a bank runs on a trade transaction before it advises, pays or issues: every party, every bank in the chain, the vessel, its owners, each port, each country and each goods line is screened against sanctions and export-control sources, and each hit is cleared or escalated with a reason. Since 2022 it includes the goods themselves, because fifty six-digit HS codes now sit on a high-priority list agreed by the United States, the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom.

How does it screen dual-use goods in a letter of credit?

Each goods line is read from the invoice, the packing list and any technical datasheet. The Classification agent proposes an export control classification with a confidence, quotes the controlling control-list entry, flags the HS code against the high-priority list and its tier, and lists the classifications it rejected and why. Anything below the confidence threshold — 0.80 in the working solution — goes to a named Export Controls Specialist, and the person who approves it records a reason code.

Who decides the ECCN — the agent or a person?

A person, always. The agent proposes an entry and states its own doubt; it never assigns a license and never decides whether one is required. In the working solution it proposes 2B991 at 0.71 confidence, shows the two entries it rejected, and hands the line to the specialist and the analyst. Their decision, the reason code, the agent's original output and its model and prompt version all stay on the record together.

How does it screen a vessel for sanctions?

The vessel, its operator and its registered and beneficial owners are screened as elements like any other, and the Voyage agent then attaches the evidence: the port calls, any ship-to-ship transfer, flag and name changes, and every period with no position signal of ten hours or more, with its start, end, duration and last known position. It records what happened and never says why a transponder was off.

Does it apply the OFAC 50 Percent Rule?

It shows the arithmetic rather than a verdict. The Ownership agent walks the chain to the ultimate holders, aggregates every blocked interest and prints the sum — 27% plus 15% is 42% in the working solution, below the 50% at which the owner would itself be blocked. A bank can set its own lower escalation threshold; at 40%, that 42% also requires a risk note from the Sanctions Compliance Officer before the transaction is released.

When must a blocked or rejected transaction be reported?

Within ten business days of the block or the rejection, and blocked property held as of June 30 is reported by September 30 each year. The Report agent drafts the report on the day of the decision, computes the deadline from the rule, attaches the hit record, the identifiers on both sides and the list version screened against, and shows the business days left. It files nothing: two named people sign.

Do people stay in control?

Yes, and the screens say so where it matters. No agent clears a hit, blocks, rejects, releases, files or changes a threshold. Every decision that moves a transaction takes a named maker and a different named checker, every override of an agent keeps the agent's original output beside the person's reason, and a role that may not act — Internal Audit — sees the locked action and the reason it is unavailable rather than a hidden button.

How long does it take to go live on our own transactions?

The Agentic Solution Engine builds the solution from your requirements, your documents and your own rules — your sources, your matching thresholds, your reason codes, your roles and your clocks — and deploys it once every quality gate has passed. We usually start on a sample of your own past presentations so you can see the manifest, the hits and the drafted rationales against decisions you already made.

Trade Finance & Correspondent Banking

More in this division.

All 9 solutions →
Trade Finance Fraud Detection

Every cargo fingerprinted and checked against the bank's own financing before funding.

1-min demoUCP 600 & ICC Rules Search

Every discrepancy question gets a cited verdict in seconds, the reasoning kept for audit.

1-min demoCorrespondent Banking Due Diligence

Every respondent's file rebuilt each cycle, with nesting checked against real payments.

1-min demo

See it on
your own presentations.

We'll run Trade Sanctions & Dual-Use Screening on a sample of your own trade transactions and their documents.

Book a demoBrowse solutions