Risk review: A risk report that shows its working.
Select a set of parsed statements and run a risk review across them. Seven rule families examine the evidence, the balance, the income, the commitments, the failed payments, laundering patterns, and behaviour. Every finding carries the transactions it came from, and nothing on the page tells you what to decide.
50 free page credits · No card · Cancel anytime
- Runs only when asked
- Evidence first
- Findings linked to rows
Risk review
4 statements · Checking ••4521
Jan 2 to Apr 30 · all 4 verified
Sorting aid, not a decision
Findings that matter
Month-end balance far exceeds the month's average in 2 months
LiquidityExisting commitments take 41% of income
ObligationsOverdrawn on 6 of 118 days
Liquidity
Evidence
Nothing flagged
Liquidity
2 findings
Inflow
Nothing flagged
Obligations
1 finding
Distress
Nothing flagged
Laundering
Nothing flagged
Behaviour
Nothing flagged
A number at the top of a page is a decision, whatever it is called.
Most statement risk tools lead with a score, and a reader acts on the score long before reaching the reasons under it. That makes the tool the decision-maker without anyone deciding it should be, and it hides the question that matters most: whether the statements could be relied on in the first place. A review worth trusting has to lead with what was examined and whether it held together, show the findings in the order they should be read, and keep any score small enough to stay a sorting aid.
How it works
How a review reads
- 1
A masthead that names the subject
The report opens on what was audited: which statements, which account, what period, and whether they verified. The band beside it says how urgently to read on, as an instruction about reading order, never an outcome.
- 2
The findings that matter, worst first
Findings are lifted out of their families and ordered by severity, so the returned payment or the stopped income is the first thing read, not the fortieth.
- 3
Evidence integrity in full
Verification against printed balances, missing days between statements, overlaps, duplicates, periods that do not meet, and currency. It qualifies every figure below it, so it is shown before them.
- 4
Six more families at a glance
Liquidity, inflow, obligations, distress, laundering, and behaviour, laid out so a family with nothing to report takes a line rather than a section.
- 5
A written summary, after the fact
A narrative is written once the report is complete and cannot change any finding or the score. It explains; it does not decide.
Principles the review is built on
On request only
A review runs when someone selects statements and asks for one, on exactly those statements. Never on import, never in the background.
Evidence before findings
Whether the statements verify, join up, and belong to one account is assessed first, because every other figure depends on it.
Every finding is checkable
Each finding opens onto the transactions it was drawn from, with the figure that triggered it.
Unassessable means left out
A family without enough data to judge is removed from the score's denominator rather than counted against the account.
No invented exchange rates
When statements span several currencies, money figures are withheld rather than converted at a rate the tool picked. Ratios and counts are still reported.
Reproducible
The audit is a function of the rows it was given and nothing else, so a report can be re-derived from its statements long after it was run.
Examples of what gets flagged
Finding titles as the report writes them, with figures filled in from the statements reviewed.
| Family | Example finding |
|---|---|
| Evidence | N days missing between statements |
| Liquidity | Month-end balance far exceeds the month's average in N months |
| Inflow | The main income stream appears in only N of M months |
| Obligations | Existing commitments take N% of income |
| Distress | N recurring commitments stopped being paid |
| Laundering | N% of inflow left again within N days |
| Behaviour | N% of spending leaves as cash |
FAQ
Common questions
Who is the risk review for?
Anyone who reads other people's bank statements to make a judgement: lenders, underwriters, brokers, and landlords, and accountants doing due diligence. It is built to shorten the reading, not to replace the reader.
Does it produce a credit score or a decision?
It produces a score, deliberately presented small and captioned as a sorting aid, and a band describing how urgently to read on. There is no approve, refer, or decline anywhere in the feature.
How are recurring payments found?
Structurally, from the same counterparty, a steady amount, and a regular day, rather than from keywords. That finds salary and loan repayments on banks whose narrations never name them.
Can it detect fraudulent statements?
It checks whether statements reconcile and join up, which catches many problems, but it cannot prove a document genuine. A PDF's own metadata is reported only as low-weight context, never as a finding on its own.
Are country-specific rules or thresholds applied?
No. The rules are jurisdiction-agnostic, because statements can be in any currency and a limit copied from one country's rules would be wrong everywhere else.
What do I need to run one?
Parsed statements in your account. Select them on the Statements page and choose to run a risk analysis. The free tier includes 50 page credits for parsing.
Keep exploring
Categorization Rules
Include, exclude, and scope rules that run on every import.
Merchant Intelligence
Every narration resolved to a named merchant with its history.
Workflows
Folders and forwarded email in; files and webhooks out.
Bank Statement Converter
What a converter has to get right, and what the file looks like when it does.
Bank Statement → Excel
Download a clean XLSX of every parsed transaction.
Read a file in the order it should be read.
Parse a set of statements you know well, run a review, and check whether it surfaces what you would have looked for.