Use cases
Where the two tools do the work
Six moments where a compliance team loses time, and what EyesClear does in each. Some need the Platform, some need Investigations, and some need both. Each tool runs on its own, alongside whatever you already have.
01 The moments
Six places a compliance team loses time
These are not processes we invented. They are the points in the work you already do where the evidence is hard to get, and where one or both tools do it for you.
Investigations
You are onboarding a client you know nothing about
A new company arrives with its owners, its officers and its history described by the company itself.
Investigations screens the company and the people behind it against the public records before the account opens. What comes back goes into the file with its sources, so the CDD decision rests on more than the application form.
PlatformInvestigations
A payment arrives from a counterparty you have never seen
An incoming SWIFT. You hold the beneficiary’s account, history and KYC file. You hold nothing at all on the party who sent the money.
The Platform raises the alert and assembles everything you already have. Investigations supplies the half that was never yours, so the case is decided on both sides of the transaction rather than the half you own.
InvestigationsPlatform
A regulator asks you to trace an entity and everything connected to it
An instruction to act on a named entity — and on whatever it is connected to, which you have to identify before you can act at all.
Investigations maps the entity’s public footprint and the parties around it. The Platform then finds every account and transaction in your own book that touches those names, and records what was done about each one.
Platform
New guidance lands and the back book has to be reviewed
A typology changes. Every case already closed under the old one may need looking at again, and the usual answer is a consultant and a three-month project.
The Platform applies the new typology across the full history overnight, and the alerts it raises arrive in the same queue the next morning, under the same maker-checker control.
Platform
A case has to become a filing
The evidence is in and somebody has to write it up. A SAR narrative takes two to four hours by hand, and then the same facts are re-keyed into the report.
The Platform drafts the narrative from the full evidence set. The analyst edits and signs it. The confirmed case flows into the regulatory report with its fields already populated.
PlatformInvestigations
An examiner asks how a decision was made
Eighteen months later, someone has to reconstruct who decided what, on what evidence, and why.
Evidence, case history and decisions are held centrally with full audit trails and instant retrieval. Every AI output traces back to source, and every public-record finding carries the quote and the date it came from.
Take the tool the moment calls for. Neither one asks you to replace what works.
Six moments, two tools
02 Efficiency levers
Where the efficiency actually comes from
Five effects that compound across the operation. They are targets to validate in a pilot, given as ranges because that is how they behave in practice.
| Efficiency lever | How it works | Indicative impact |
|---|---|---|
| Single platform, zero switchover | One view of transactions, CRM, KYC and enrichments. No re-keying, no switching between five to eight systems. | Analyst time returned |
| Automated workflows and case linking | Dynamic workflows, case linking, email integration and auto-closure remove the manual handoffs and the copy-paste. | Less handling per case |
| AI narratives on centralised data | The AI drafts the SAR narrative from the full dataset. The analyst reviews and approves. | Hours become minutes |
| Back-dated runs eliminate projects | A new typology applied across full history in minutes, instead of a three-to-six-month consultant remediation. | US$100K–500K+ per event |
| Centralised proof and audit readiness | All evidence, history and decisions in one place with full audit trails. No folder shuffling at exam time. | Capacity freed at exam time |
Drafting a SAR narrative falls from two to four hours to minutes. Remediation to a new typology falls from months to overnight. The two numbers to watch in a pilot are average handling time per case, and analyst hours returned to higher-value work.
Effort required for each case is substantially reduced, whether EyesClear runs the operation or works alongside it.
Business value and return on investment
03 Institutions
Who runs it
EyesClear is proven with mid-tier and regional banks. The same services are configured for the institution rather than rebuilt for it — a compliance function is the same shape wherever it sits.
- Retail and commercial banks
- Broker-dealers and investment firms
- Payment service providers
- Asset managers and fund administrators
- Virtual asset service providers
04 What runs underneath
The capabilities behind those moments
You do not have to hold all of this in your head to buy it. It is here because procurement asks, and because the moments above are only credible if the parts exist.
- AI-assisted alert resolution
- AI maker, analyst checker.
- The AI assembles the evidence and drafts a recommended disposition. The analyst reviews, edits and signs. Nothing closes without a human decision.
- Sanctions-alert processing
- Screening alerts resolved in the same queue as everything else.
- EyesClear does not screen payments in real time. It takes the sanctions and name-matching alerts your screening platform raises and resolves them through the same maker-checker workflow. Its own analysis can also flag sanctions concerns for referral to the screening team.
- SAR narrative creation
- Two to four hours of drafting becomes minutes.
- Narratives drafted from the alert and the full evidence set — internal records plus externally collected information — ready for review and submission.
- AI-supported customer risk scoring
- Risk that reflects what the customer is actually doing.
- Risk scores driven by each customer’s actual transaction behaviour, not just their CRM and KYC attributes, and refreshed as activity occurs.
- AI-supported internet investigation
- External context arrives with the case.
- Open-source collection that maps a customer’s connections to related parties and external entities, straight into the case file. This is EyesClear Investigations, described in full below — it screens against the public records and reports every finding with the quote it came from.
- Dynamic forms
- The compliance team designs the capture, not the vendor.
- Your team designs what a case captures — KYC refresh fields, asset declarations, any structured follow-up — and the form goes live without a vendor change request. What is keyed in lands in the case and is analysed like any other evidence.
- AML remediation (back-book review)
- Months of manual review compressed into days.
- Historical cases re-reviewed against new typologies or supervisory recommendations, using retroactive reprocessing.
- Regulatory reporting
- Local regulatory fit without a local development project.
- Cases are selected, structured and output in the format each regime requires — Türkiye’s MASAK ŞİB/STR, CRS and FATCA among them — with submission tracking. A new report type is configuration, not development.
- Compliance control support
- The control framework is maintained, not just installed.
- Ongoing support for your control framework: scenario and typology tuning, model-governance artefacts and examination support.
How the Platform works →What Investigations does →
Which moment would you start with?
Most start where the backlog is: an alert queue that will not clear, a remediation that keeps being deferred, or an onboarding check that takes a week.