Defensible AI for Financial Crime Investigations

They built the alarm.
Nobody built the investigation.

Clarté helps BSA teams document reasoning, surface evidence on both sides, and produce decisions they can defend in an exam.

Built first for BSA / AML teams at banks under real examiner pressure.

Request a Design-Partner Walkthrough →See Sample Cases
38
Bayesian detectors
41
Regulatory typologies
12
AI support agents
1,987
Engine tests

The Problem

$48 billion a year on compliance. 95% of alerts are false positives.

95%

False positive rate

Analysts spend 30–60 minutes per case investigating alerts that are overwhelmingly noise.

45m

Per case review

Open 6 systems, read history, write a paragraph, hope the manager approves.

$15K+

Fully loaded SAR cost

When the examiner asks "How did you decide?" — the answer determines if you pass.

Sources: LexisNexis Risk Solutions, True Cost of Financial Crime Compliance (2024) · PwC, Global Economic Crime Survey · FinCEN SAR cost estimates (2021) · OCC Model Risk Management Handbook

Why Now

The buying reality is shifting.

Supervisory guidance is moving in a clear direction, and BSA/AML buyers are responding. Three things stand out for any team thinking about their next exam:

01
Exam expectations are rising.
Programs are increasingly judged on whether they actually work — not on whether every step was followed. "We ran the alerts" isn't enough. Officers need to show how the decision was made.
02
AI without documentation is hard to defend.
Models that can't explain their outputs become harder to stand behind in front of an examiner. Reasoning trails, governance, and explainability are turning into buying criteria.
03
Buyers expect evidence trails, governance, and explainability.
The institutions investing now are the ones that want to be ready before the next exam asks "how did you decide?" — with answers an examiner can trace.

Clarté was built for this direction. Transparent decisions. Documented reasoning. Audit trails that hold.

The question isn't whether the bar is rising. It's whether you'll be ready when it does.

See It In Action

Three cases. Three outcomes. Same framework.

Every case gets the same analysis. The evidence determines the outcome.

Live Processing
Global Express Traders Inc
127 transactions · Sep 2025 – Mar 2026
3.6s
Upload
Detect
Validate
Done
Structuring Pattern
20%
Transaction Velocity
60%
Fund Hold Time
84%
Geographic Exposure
93%
Outflow Ratio
97%
Round Dollar Pattern
98%
Crypto Activity
96%
Peer Comparison
98%
Funnel Pattern
99%
CTR Proximity
99%
8 suspicious · 2 exculpatory
99%ESCALATE
✓ 127 transactions · 3.6s
Global Express Traders Inc
127 txns · Business
99%ESCALATE
Click any signal for details.
Structuring Pattern▲
20%
Near-identical cash deposits — strong structuring
Transaction Velocity▲
60%
Volume far exceeds stated revenue
Fund Hold Time▲
84%
Funds leave same day or next day
Geographic Exposure▲
93%
Activity with high-risk jurisdictions
Outflow Ratio▲
97%
Account draining nearly all funds
Round Dollar Pattern▲
98%
High proportion round-dollar amounts
Crypto Activity▼
96%
No crypto transactions
Peer Comparison▲
98%
Significantly exceeds industry peers
Funnel Pattern▲
99%
Many sources in, few destinations out
CTR Proximity▼
99%
Not clustered near CTR threshold
8 suspicious · 2 exculpatoryESCALATE: 99%

System prepares — officer decides. Every action logged in a tamper-evident audit trail.

Built-In Safeguards

A system that knows when it doesn't know.

Most systems give you a score and leave you alone. Clarté tells you when to trust the score, when to question it, and when to stop and think.

⚡
The score says CLEAR, but one signal is screaming.
The system overrides the score and forces review. Some signals are too dangerous to average away.
◎
The score says INVESTIGATE, but it could easily go either way.
The system tells you exactly how fragile the result is. When small changes could flip the determination, you see a warning.
⇆
Two different models look at the same case and disagree.
The system blocks you from proceeding until you write down why. That rationale becomes part of the permanent audit record.
⊞
There's evidence on both sides.
The system shows both. Explicitly. No hiding the green flags behind the red ones. You see the full picture before you decide.

Founder

Three lines of defense.
One founder who's worked all three.

I've sat across from examiners defending decisions I couldn't fully explain — because the tools didn't give me the language. I've written SARs at 11pm wondering if I caught everything. I've watched a 2-person BSA team drown in 300 monthly alerts knowing that 285 of them were noise.

Most compliance tools are built by engineers who've never filed a SAR, or consultants who've never written code. I've done both — and I've audited the tools other people built. That's why Clarté works differently.

1st Line — BSA Analyst
Community bank
Investigated cases, filed SARs, survived exams. Learned what examiners actually ask — and what answers satisfy them.
2nd Line — Financial Crimes Compliance Advisor
Big Four consulting
Led consent order remediation and program reviews for global banks. Directed 40+ analysts across the US and APAC. Delivered the roadmaps that turned failing programs into passing ones.
3rd Line — Payments Compliance Audit
Major technology company
3rd-line audit across billions in payment volume. Built AI-powered audit tools. Evaluated the systems other people trust.
CAMS Certified
ACAMS — Industry standard credential for AML professionals
"I know what the examiner asks because I've been the person the examiner asks. I built Clarté to give the answer I always wished I had."
Not just experienced — structurally positioned. The rare builder who understands exam risk, the math, and the systems that connect them.

Design-Partner Targets

What we're building toward.

Target outcomes for a 2-person BSA team processing ~300 alerts per month. Numbers represent design-partner objectives, not guaranteed outcomes — measured continuously and published in our calibration reports.

Time per case
45 min→5 min
90% reduction in review time per case
Monthly analyst hours
225 hrs→25 hrs
200 hours back — for actual investigation, not alert triage
Exam readiness
Scramble→Always
Continuous readiness — not a 2-week fire drill before every exam

This isn't headcount reduction. It's giving your team back the time to do the work that actually matters.

For Model Validators & Risk Committees

We publish everything.

Full Bayesian methodology paper. Model risk alignment memo with mapped supervisory requirements. Known limitations register. Validation framework with recalibration governance. 1,987-test coverage summary. Every parameter traceable. Every limitation documented.

Methodology Paper Model Risk Alignment Known Limitations Validation Framework Test Coverage

Available under NDA. Request technical documentation →

The Moment That Matters

Your next exam is coming.
What will you show them?

The examiner opens a case file and asks three questions.

"How did you decide this case was not suspicious?"
Without Clarté
"The score was low and the analyst reviewed it."
With Clarté
"38 detectors evaluated 83 transactions. 8 fired — all exculpatory. The challenger agreed. Here's the hash-verified audit trail."
"Why did this case take 45 days to resolve?"
Without Clarté
"We had a backlog."
With Clarté
"Flagged INVESTIGATE day 1. Entered review day 3. Additional history requested day 12. Determination recorded day 18. Every action timestamped."
"How do you know your model is working?"
Without Clarté
"Our vendor says it's validated."
With Clarté
"Content-hashed model version. Validation metrics: precision, recall, per-detector lift. Challenger independently verifies. 12 weeks of drift monitoring."

Where We Are Today

A live build, a real founder, an open design-partner program.

Where Clarté stands today — and what's available now to BSA leaders, validators, and design partners.

Built On
Direct BSA workflow experience
First-line analyst, second-line advisor, third-line auditor — designed by someone who's been in the seat.
Q3 2026
Design-partner program opening
Selecting 3–5 community banks for free 60–90-day pilots. First empirical calibration report at end of Q4 2026.
Available now
Sample cases on the site
Three live cases — CLEAR, INVESTIGATE, ESCALATE — running on the same engine. See evidence, safeguards, typologies.
Under NDA
Technical documentation
Methodology paper, model risk alignment memo, validation framework, limitations register. Available to validators on request.

See how your decisions
would stand up in an exam.

Start with our sample cases — or request a design-partner walkthrough on your own data.

Request a Design-Partner Walkthrough → or see sample cases →

We work with BSA teams who aren't just managing alert backlog — they're rethinking how decisions are made.