Workstreams

What exists today, and what does not yet.

The architecture is domain-agnostic — the same four stages apply to any process where a document is read, a figure is derived, and someone is accountable for the result. The deployments are deliberately narrow. We build where being wrong is most expensive, prove a workstream against a real operation, and extend from there.

In production

Trade reconciliation

In production

Counterparty confirmations matched against internal records to a tolerance you set. Breaks are itemised with the fields that disagree.

Inputs: Counterparty confirmations and internal position records, in the formats your operations team already receives.
What is checked: Every matched field agrees within the tolerance you configure. Unmatched and partially matched items are itemised, not summarised away.
What a reviewer sees: A break report listing each disagreement, the fields involved, and the size of the difference.
Where the gate sits: A named reviewer clears each break, or accepts it with a recorded reason, before it leaves the queue.

Financial statement analysis

In production

Filings and management accounts read into a validated figure set, with metrics computed and commentary drafted for review.

Inputs: Filed financial statements, management accounts and supporting schedules, as PDF or scanned documents.
What is checked: Arithmetic consistency within each statement, cross-statement agreement (for example, cash-flow adjustments against the balance-sheet movements they claim to explain), and consistent labelling across every table and period.
What a reviewer sees: A figure table with every value traceable to its source page, alongside commentary drafted from the validated figures.
Where the gate sits: A named reviewer approves the analysis before it is released. Any unresolved validation failure blocks approval.

Credit assessment

In production

Counterparty financials, rating reports and a transaction's own terms spread into a deterministic scorecard, with an investment recommendation and a repayment-capacity forecast drafted for review.

Inputs: Counterparty financial statements across multiple periods, and — where available, never required — a rating-agency report, the programme memorandum or prospectus, and PENCOM and ESG compliance certificates.
What is checked: The same arithmetic and cross-statement checks used in statement analysis, then a weighted scorecard across profitability, liquidity, gearing, solvency, efficiency, activity and asset-quality ratios, a rating notch mapped to the scorecard's own scale by a declared rule rather than a judgement call, and every drafted sentence checked against the computed figures before release.
What a reviewer sees: A scored factor for every input the spread and the attached documents support, an offering analysis with an investment recommendation derived from the proposed grade by a fixed rule, and a repayment-capacity forecast that flags any projected period where debt-service cover falls short of the transaction's own covenant.
Where the gate sits: A named credit officer confirms the proposed grade or overrides it with a recorded reason. A second, different person approves the memo before release.

Market & sector research

In production

Briefs on a named company or sector, drawn from a verified source universe and constrained search, with every claim checked against a stored, snapshotted passage before it ships.

Inputs: A company or sector, the sections you want covered, and any specific questions. Acquisition draws on a verified source universe — the central bank, the national statistics office, exchanges, regulators and vetted financial press — plus constrained open search for recency.
What is checked: Every claim is checked against a retrievable passage snapshotted at the moment it was acquired, so a source going stale later never orphans a claim already delivered. A quoted figure that does not match its cited passage is refused, whether drafted by the engine or edited in by a reviewer. Press-tier sources are checked for freshness; regulatory bulletins and filings are not held to that clock.
What a reviewer sees: A coverage summary by section and source tier, an evidence board carrying every source with its publisher, tier and snapshot, and a gap card wherever acquisition found insufficient coverage or a draft failed the citation check.
Where the gate sits: A named reviewer accepts or resolves every open gap, with a written note either way, and confirms the brief before it is circulated. Nothing ships with an open gap or a failing citation check.

In development

Described honestly as future work. No capability below is shown in the production section, and none of it is available today.

Payment operations

In development

Instruction review and exception handling. The platform will draft and check; it will not hold credentials that can move money.

Inputs: Payment instructions and the records they should reconcile against.
What is checked: Instruction fields against source documentation and standing data, with exceptions raised rather than silently passed.
What a reviewer sees: A reviewed instruction with exceptions itemised.
Where the gate sits: A named approver releases the instruction into your existing payment system. The platform never holds a credential capable of moving funds.

Transaction documents

In development

Extraction of terms, dates and obligations from executed documents, each traced to its clause.

Inputs: Executed contracts and transaction documents.
What is checked: Extracted terms are checked for internal consistency against related clauses in the same document.
What a reviewer sees: A structured summary of terms, each linked to the clause it was extracted from.
Where the gate sits: A named reviewer confirms the extraction before it is used downstream.