AI for insights and analytics
A register with 640 obligations reports 92 percent control coverage; counted strictly, with an owner and a test in the last cycle, it is 73 percent, and twelve of the unmapped obligations are rated high. AI analytics reads the register, the testing log and the issue tracker, and answers the head of compliance: where is coverage thin, and who is sitting on findings.
These are the questions compliance teams ask. Each one maps to a measure our tools compute from your files. The AI model chooses the measure and explains the result; the arithmetic is done by our code, and every total is checked.
| The question | The measure behind it | What comes back |
|---|---|---|
| What is our real control coverage? | Obligation to control coverage | Obligations with a mapped, owned and tested control, by rating and business unit, against the headline figure. |
| Which regulatory changes have no control yet? | Regulatory change coverage | Changes received in the period against controls mapped, with the high-rated ones listed. |
| Which tests are overdue? | Testing on schedule | Controls tested within their cycle over controls due, by owner, with the overdue list. |
| Whose findings are ageing? | Issue ageing by owner | Open findings by owner and age band, with the ones past their target date. |
| Who has not completed required training? | Training against role requirement | Completion against the requirement for each role, by unit, with the overdue names for the unit head. |
| Where is evidence missing? | Evidence completeness | Controls tested with complete evidence over controls tested, by owner. |
Every figure below was computed by a tool from the rows and checked before it was shown. The lines sum; the percentages match; each line opens to the rows that make it.
How many high-rated obligations have no tested control?
28 high-rated obligations have no control that is mapped, owned and tested in the last cycle, across 3 business units. Payments unit accounts for 14 of them, 50% of the total.
| Payments unit | 14 | 50% of the total |
| Lending unit | 9 | 32% of the total |
| Wealth unit | 5 | 18% of the total |
| The 3 lines sum to | 28 | 0 unexplained |
Which ones in payments?
3 obligations account for 14 of the 14 gaps in the Payments unit, 100% of them. Each arrived through regulatory change in the last year and was never mapped to a control.
| Payment services regulation update | 7 | received 8 months ago; no control mapped |
| Sanctions screening standard | 4 | control mapped; no owner |
| Operational resilience rule | 3 | owner assigned; never tested |
| These 3 are | 14 | 100% of Payments unit |
What goes on the committee agenda?
The twelve, with an owner and a date each. The head of compliance reports coverage by the strict definition from now on, beside the old figure, until the two agree.
| Payments compliance lead | Map and assign controls for the seven payment obligations | This month |
| Control owners | Test the three resilience controls | This cycle |
| Head of compliance | Report strict coverage to the committee | Quarterly |
Each measure has one formula, one source and one meaning. They are computed per business unit and owner and in total, and every one carries an identity that must hold before it is shown.
| Measure | Formula | From | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obligation to control coverage | Obligations with a mapped, owned and tested control ÷ obligations, weighted by risk rating | Obligations register; control library | Obligations with nothing behind them |
| Regulatory change coverage | New or changed obligations with a control mapped within the stated days ÷ new or changed obligations | Regulatory change log; control library | Whether the register keeps up |
| Testing on schedule | Control tests completed by due date ÷ tests due, by risk rating | Testing schedule | Controls that slipped, highest risk first |
| Failure rate and repeat failures | Tests failed ÷ tests completed; failures on controls that failed the prior test | Test results | Remediation that did not work |
| Issue ageing by owner | Open issues past remediation date, by owner, days overdue, number of extensions | Issues log | Where findings wait |
| Training against role requirement | Required modules completed and in date ÷ required modules, per person, by unit | Learning system; role matrix | Who is overdue, and where |
| Incident reporting against activity | Incidents reported per unit of activity, by business unit, against the firm median | Incident log; activity volumes | Units that report nothing |
| Policy attestation | Staff attested within the window ÷ staff required, by policy and unit | Attestation records | Policies nobody has confirmed reading |
| Time to close findings | Median days from finding to verified closure, by severity and source | Issues log | Whether serious findings close faster than minor ones |
| Evidence completeness | Tested controls with evidence attached and dated ÷ tested controls | Testing records | Assertions that could not be shown to a regulator |
Each measure is worked through, with the export it comes from and what to drop, in KPIs for compliance teams.
From your question and the measures declared for compliance, the model picks the one that answers it, and the period and comparison the question implies.
Deterministic code reads the rows, computes the measure, and checks the identities below. The same question on the same data gives the same answer, every time.
The AI model writes the sentence around the result, naming the business unit or account behind it. It states no figure that is not in the result, and every figure links to its rows.
| Coverage | Obligations = mapped, owned and tested + mapped with a gap + unmapped |
| Testing | Tests due = completed on time + completed late + overdue |
| Issues | Opening issues + raised − closed = closing issues |
| Training | Required = completed in date + expired + never completed |
The exports compliance teams already produce. Column names are mapped once and the mapping is reused. A file is the way in; scheduled delivery and connections to your systems come with the plan, and every source is listed here.
An answer is a list with an owner and a cadence, or it is a chart nobody works.
| Measures | Owner | Cadence |
|---|---|---|
| Issue ageing; testing on schedule | Issue and control owners; head of compliance | Monthly |
| Training; attestation | Unit heads | Monthly |
| Obligation and regulatory change coverage | Head of compliance | Quarterly, and on each regulatory change |
| Incident reporting against activity; repeat failures; evidence | Head of compliance; risk committee | Quarterly |
An obligation counts as covered only when a control is mapped to it, that control has a named owner, and it was tested within its cycle with evidence. Each condition is a column in your files; the tool applies all three and shows the count at each step, so the difference from the headline figure is explained line by line.
Yes. It needs the obligation register, the control library with owners, the testing log and the issue tracker, in whatever export your platform produces. Column names are mapped once. If a field is missing, such as owner, the tool says the condition cannot be evaluated rather than assuming it passed.
No. Ratings come from your register. The tool counts, joins and lists; it never rates an obligation or judges a control. The judgement stays with compliance, made from figures that are complete.
Issue ageing by owner is a list: each open finding, its owner, its age and its target date, ranked by overdue days. It goes to the committee as it is, and the same question next month shows what closed.
Issue ageing · Testing cadence · Training coverage · Exit criterion · Control total · Identity
Asset managers · Commercial banking · Construction and building materials · Consulting and advisory · Customer service · Distributors · Education · Finance and FP&A teams · Financial services · FMCG and CPG brands · Foodservice distributors · Freight brokers and 3PLs · Healthcare and med-tech · Hospitality · Industrial distributors · Industrial manufacturers · Insurance brokers · Investment banking · Law firms · Oil and gas services · Pharma · Procurement · Retail banking · SaaS · Sales teams · Shipping and logistics · Sports · Supply chain · Tax and accounting · Telecoms and connectivity · Trading · Wealth managers
Bring a few thousand rows. The data map opens next, every column mapped once, and the first question is answered in minutes. Free, in your browser, no account.