Tiered identity verification, a document review workflow, role-based admin access and withdrawal controls — the compliance surface, minus the claims software cannot make.
Software cannot make you compliant. It can give you the controls a compliance programme needs, and an auditable record that they were applied.
That distinction matters when you are buying: a vendor claiming their platform makes you compliant is describing something that does not exist.
Identity verification
What a user goes through before they can fund or trade.
- Selfie plus passport or ID verification
- Tiered verification levels, with limits attached to each
- A document workflow for review, approval and audit
- Account controls — suspension and account-level restrictions
Operational controls
The controls an AML programme actually leans on.
- Admin approval and review on withdrawals
- Withdrawal limits per asset and per network
- Role-based admin permissions, so reviewers are not administrators
- Deposits, withdrawals, trades and transfers in one auditable view
What sits outside the software
Stated directly, because buyers are often told otherwise.
- Your licence, in your jurisdiction
- Your AML policy and the people who run it
- Sanctions and PEP screening providers, which the platform integrates with rather than replaces
- Regulatory reporting obligations
Questions you might have
Does this make us compliant?
No. It gives you the controls and the audit trail a compliance programme uses. The programme, the licence and the people are yours.
Can we use our own KYC provider?
Yes. KYC provider integration is part of the standard scope.
Can reviewers be separated from admins?
Yes, through role-based access. That separation is usually the first thing an auditor asks about.
See this part of the stack running
A technical demo walks the architecture with someone who deploys it. Bring your engineer — the questions that matter here are theirs.