Most Compliance Teams Aren’t Drowning in Risk. They’re drowning in noise.
Blog post from Socure
Sanctions screening teams often face excessive false positives because legacy systems primarily compare customer names against watchlists without reliably resolving the underlying individual, forcing analysts to manually clear most alerts. Socure argues that identity-resolved screening should establish a person’s identity before screening by incorporating data such as date of birth, addresses, devices, employment, residential history, and relationship signals from its Identity Graph. Its approach combines name-matching techniques for exact, fuzzy, phonetic, transliterated, and aliased names with an entity-correlation score that evaluates whether the customer is actually the listed person, while AI-generated narratives explain each decision. The company reports that customer deployments have achieved a 78% reduction in false positives, 99.8% name-match accuracy, and roughly $1 million in annual operational savings from a back-book review, framing the approach as a way to shift analysts’ attention from routine name collisions toward meaningful sanctions risk.
No tracked trend matches for this post yet.
Use this post, company, and trend context to find content marketing opportunities, perform competitive analysis, or address product feature gaps via the Plushcap MCP server or the Plushcap API.