AML Technology Selection
Choosing AML technology starts with the decisions and workflows the system must support. A selection discussion can help teams turn business and financial crime risks into clear requirements and comparable evaluation evidence before they choose a supplier.
Set requirements before reviewing products
A useful requirements matrix links each need to its owner, priority, evidence and evaluation method. It can cover the activity and risk to be addressed; expected data inputs and outputs; alert or case-handling steps; integration with existing systems; reporting and auditability; user roles; and operational constraints. Requirements should reflect the firm's products, customers, channels, transaction profile and current processes rather than a generic feature list.
The FCA Handbook's financial crime rules and guidance address how firms identify, assess, monitor and manage money laundering risk, with systems proportionate to their nature, scale and complexity. FATF standards ask countries to assess risk and apply measures suited to their circumstances. Neither source prescribes a product or procurement method. Both provide context for checking whether requirements reflect the firm's risks and applicable framework.
Compare proof, workflow and fit
A proof of value is most useful when each supplier responds to the same realistic scenarios and agreed measures. Depending on scope, evaluation questions may cover how data is received and validated, how configured scenarios produce results, how staff investigate and record decisions, and whether relevant events and changes can be reviewed later. Use suitable test data and agree how its handling will be governed.
Assess integration assumptions alongside the user journey: where information originates, how it moves between teams and systems, which steps remain manual, and who owns exceptions. Consider implementation dependencies, migration, training, support, ongoing data or service costs, and how the organisation could manage change or exit. A requirements matrix can make trade-offs visible without reducing the decision to a feature score or headline price.
Use comparable evidence to support the decision
The selection work identifies the jurisdiction, operating model, purchase stage and decisions still open. Useful evidence includes risk and process documentation, architecture diagrams, draft requirements and evaluation criteria. Reviewing these materials helps identify gaps, prioritise requirements and compare vendor evidence.
Supplier evaluation can clarify how evidence supports each requirement and which assumptions remain unresolved. Technical, security, legal, procurement and contract reviews may also be needed. The organisation remains responsible for the final selection and implementation. Applicable obligations depend on the firm's activities and jurisdiction.
Common questions
What should an AML technology proof of value test?
Test the same agreed scenarios and evidence with each supplier: relevant data handling, workflow, outputs, traceability, integration assumptions and operational fit. The measures should come from the firm's requirements and risk context.
Will Barritt Consulting recommend a particular AML vendor?
The work can help define requirements and compare suppliers' evidence against them. The organisation makes the final selection, with any advisory role agreed before the work begins.