The risk-based AML assessment platform

From a name to a decision you can defend.

ProofAML is where a compliance team runs the whole loop — screen, assess, document, and monitor — against one transparent, source-cited corpus. The data is the substrate; the decision and its defensibility are the product.

One consolidated corpusEvery record cited to its authorityRuns in your browser


The one workflow

Screen → Assess → Document → Monitor

One corpus, narrated as a single loop instead of a pile of datasets. Each stage is a capability we already run — shown here at its honest, shipped status.

ScreenLive

Is this party on a list?

Run a name against the consolidated corpus — sanctions, PEP, and law-enforcement families kept deliberately distinct, never conflated into one score.

Faceted name & alias search, in your browser
AssessLive

What does the match mean — and how risky is it?

Source-context tells you what a hit on this list implies. PEP tiering says how exposed the person is; relationship edges surface who stands behind them.

Source-context · PEP tiers · RCA · EDD report
DocumentMVP

Prove the work.

Turn the assessment into a defensible record: a case, a reason-coded disposition, and a maker/checker decision with an audit event behind every call.

Case workspace · disposition · audit event
MonitorRoadmap

Tell me when something changes.

Re-screen the book of business as lists change; surface newly designated, modified, and delisted parties over time.

Change feed & re-screen — on the roadmap

Assess · the differentiator

We interpret the match — we don't just return it

A raw data feed hands you a row and stops. The assess stage is the part a feed cannot do: it tells the analyst what the hit actually means and how exposed the subject is.

◧ Source-context

What a match means

A hit on one list is a block; on another it is enhanced due diligence; on a third it is a note for the file. Source-context spells out the action each list actually implies, so nobody over- or under-calls a match.

Block · EDD · note
◨ PEP tiers & RCA

How exposed, and who's behind them

A 9-branch PEP taxonomy with Level 1/2/3 tiers, current vs. former status, and retention windows — derived at render. Relationship edges surface the relatives and close associates behind a name, from official sources only.

L1 · L2 · L3 · RCAcurrent / former
◫ EDD report

One assessable view

The enhanced-due-diligence report assembles jurisdiction, source lineage, PEP tier, and the ownership control-graph into a single printable dossier — with country-risk scoring deepening as it rolls out.

jurisdiction · lineage · KYB

Sanctions, PEP, and law-enforcement records stay three distinct kinds of thing — a binding prohibition, a risk classification, and an unproven allegation. Different actions, never conflated.


Document · the durable moat

Turn an assessment into a record you can defend

This is the MLRO's and the auditor's stage — the part a screening-only tool never gives you: proof, two years later, that the work was done and followed policy.

✎ Case workspace

A decision, with a maker and a checker

Every alert can become a case with a reason-coded disposition and a four-eyes (maker/checker) decision — each recorded as an audit event. Cleared or escalated, the reasoning is captured, not lost.

Hash-chained decision log & SAR-ready export are on the roadmap.

▤ Audit trail

Reconstruct any past decision

Match
Screened → 1 potential hit
Assess
Source-context + PEP tier attached
Maker
Disposition: escalate · reason coded
Checker
Four-eyes approved
Lineage
Traced to the list version observed

Schematic of the recorded trail — not a real case.


Proof · credibility of method

Every record traces back to the authority that issued it

The sharpest live differentiator is transparency: we enumerate the per-upstream license we redistribute under, source by source — rather than flattening everything into one aggregate license.

103,090Entities published
55Official sources, each fully cited
51,751Politically exposed persons
2026-07-31As observed on this date

ProofAML is not the issuing authority — it is the citable copy of record. Every entry names the list that issued it, its program, the list version, and the date we observed it, so a compliance team can trace any decision back to its source. Honest scale is shown as evidence of method, not a scoreboard.


Built for your regime

Does it cover the regime you're liable under?

An MLRO's first trust question. The landing adapts its regulator framing by market — pick your edition, and the obligations, sources, and statutes reframe to the authorities you answer to.


Who it's for

Four practitioners, one loop — each sees their own job

Nobody wants a PEP taxonomy; they want to decide and defend. Each role lives in a stage of the workflow.

Compliance / screening analyst

Clear or escalate this alert quickly and correctly — without over- or under-calling it.

Screen → AssessFast search plus source-context, PEP tier, and RCA so a hit is interpretable, not just returned.

MLRO / Head of Compliance

Stand behind my team's decisions to a regulator, and know my program covers the regimes I'm liable under.

Assess → Document → MonitorAn audit-grade case trail, jurisdiction coverage for your regime, and a defensible methodology.

KYC / onboarding ops

Screen every new customer and counterparty at onboarding, and route the exceptions.

Screen → DocumentClean escalation into cases and KYB for business onboarding; batch throughput on the roadmap.

Auditor / QA reviewer

Reconstruct why a past decision was made, and whether it followed policy.

DocumentImmutable case history, reason-coded dispositions, and lineage back to the list version observed.

Screen your first name now

No account, no upload leaves your machine — the screening tool runs entirely in your browser and sends no analytics.

Integrity & transparency

We publish what is shipped and clearly label what is forthcoming. ProofAML is not an issuing authority; each page reflects an official public source as observed on a stated date, and every designation traces to the list version it came from. Individuals sought by law enforcement are presumed innocent. Data under CC BY 4.0.