Full reasoning chain
Every conclusion carries its reasoning and a citation to the source document, with agent actions and human overrides recorded in sequence.
Solution · AML Investigations
Every alert answered, with a reason.
AML investigation software for alert triage and disposition: monitoring alerts dispositioned with a written rationale, cases investigated end to end, and regulatory narratives drafted for review — built for alert volume that outpaces the team.
ScopeEvidenceFinding
AML investigation software helps compliance teams examine alerts raised by transaction-monitoring or screening systems. RiskPulse applies the institution's policy to plan the investigation, gather approved evidence, test relevant risks and prepare a reasoned disposition for human review.
Monitoring, triage, investigation and case management are not the same job.
Frequently asked questions
What is AML investigation software?
AML investigation software helps compliance teams examine alerts raised by transaction-monitoring or screening systems, applying policy-driven checks to entities, transactions and context so an analyst can reach a documented decision faster.
Does RiskPulse replace a transaction-monitoring system?
No. RiskPulse does not replace transaction monitoring. It takes the alerts your monitoring or screening systems raise and performs the downstream investigation, evidence gathering and disposition work.
How does AI support AML alert triage?
AI plans the investigation from your policy, gathers approved evidence, tests relevant typologies and drafts a reasoned disposition — reducing the manual assembly work so analysts spend their time on judgment, not lookups.
How does RiskPulse handle multiple related alerts?
RiskPulse identifies when several alerts share an entity or overlapping transactions and investigates them as one case, so a customer is assessed once rather than separately for each alert.
Can analysts review or override AI-generated findings?
Yes. Every finding is presented with its supporting evidence and reasoning for an analyst to review, adjust or override before a disposition is finalized. Final decisions remain with your team.
How does RiskPulse preserve evidence and audit history?
Every step — the evidence gathered, the reasoning applied and any analyst changes — is recorded in the case, producing an auditable history that can be reviewed by QA or an examiner.
The work
What the file
actually takes.
RiskPulse does not replace your transaction monitoring system. It takes what that system raises and investigates from there, returning the outcome to the case system your team already works in.
01
Alert
The alert arrives from your monitoring system with its scenario, parties and transactions.
02
Triage
The case is scoped, related alerts identified, and cross-alert overlap assessed so one entity is investigated once.
03
Investigation
Parties screened, flows traced, business context established, and transaction patterns tested against known money laundering typologies.
04
Disposition
Each dimension scored, the composite determined, and the outcome reasoned against your policy.
05
Reporting
Where a filing is warranted, the narrative is drafted in your template for a person to review and submit.
Where the agents run
Plan. Examine. Report.
The same three agents run this case type as run every other. What differs is the policy behind them — the plan template, the dimensions scored, the tools available, and the report that comes out.
Cross-alert analysis, so one entity is one case.
Alerts arrive independently but activity does not. When several alerts share an entity and overlapping transactions, RiskPulse establishes that they are one story rather than several — additive for monitoring priority, but not multiplicative for risk. It is the difference between investigating a customer once and investigating them four times.
- Written rationale per alert — every disposition reasoned, not closed on a code
- Typology testing — patterns assessed against structuring, layering and placement indicators, and the absence of them recorded
- Retail and payment fraud — merchant, chargeback and account-level fraud investigated on the same engine under its own policy
- Narrative drafting — regulatory reports drafted in your format, for a person to validate and file
Policy for this case type
Configured,
not hardcoded.
Nothing on this page is fixed in the product. Every element below is a policy setting you define, which is why the same platform runs this case type and the four others.
- Domain
- Correspondent, commercial, retail or payments — each with its own categories and policy.
- Risk dimensions
- Party, transaction, jurisdiction, business context and alert risk for money laundering; merchant, control, collusion and documentation risk for fraud.
- Override rules
- The conditions that force an outcome regardless of the weighted score — defined by you, applied consistently.
- Review gates
- Configurable by scenario and score band; low-risk dispositions can run to sign-off, escalations cannot.
Controls
Defensible
after the fact.
The same governance and quality controls apply to this case type as to every other — because an examiner does not lower the standard for the harder files.
Quality control
Sampling built in
A sampling methodology sits behind this case type, so your quality team can assess a representative sample rather than reviewing at random.
Quality assurance
Independent assessment
A separate set of agents assesses case quality end to end against your methodology — a second opinion on the work.
See it on your own file
Bring a real case.
We’ll show you the workflow.
Pick a real file or a closed case and see how RiskPulse plans it, evidences it, and writes it up under your policy.
Request Demo