Benchmark Sanction Screening System Performance  Global Benchmark will enable a financial institution to regularly measure the performance of their sanction screening systems in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, and then compare their scores to the industry-standard aggregated scores of their peers around the world. 

AML Analytics publishes monthly global, regional and industry specific Benchmark scores for both client screening and payment screening systems at Control and Manipulated level. We also provide specific Benchmark scores for Chinese Character testing and are the only company in the world to offer this.

AML Analytics creates a monthly Global Benchmark standardised test file using up-to-the-minute data from the most important global sanction lists for customers to run through their sanction screening system. Our unique testing process is straightforward and cost effective and we ensure that we have reflected important industry criteria in the scope of our Global Benchmark tests. 

Even if scores for Control are close to 100%, any misses will be exact names taken directly from sanction lists that are not being captured by a screening system. If the entire OFAC-SDN list of over 22,000 names was tested, a seemingly high score of 99% at Control level would still mean that 220 names in their original form may not have been identified and captured by a screening system.

The peer comparison process is easy using the advanced analysis features and interactive graphics available in our portal, Analyser Online.

To find out more, contact a member of the AML Analytics team by clicking on the interactive map

 

 

Global Benchmark Scores  The Global Benchmark scores seen scrolling below are the very latest monthly scores that have been compiled using test results from all our Global Benchmark customers around the world.

These scores represent the average performance levels of sanction screening systems at both Control and Manipulated level for client screening and payment screening systems.

Global Benchmark is the easiest way to compare the performance of your sanction screening systems with your peers around the globe.

98.37%

CONTROL – CLIENT SCREENING

97.18%

CONTROL – PAYMENT SCREENING

90.54%

MANIPULATED – CLIENT SCREENING

92.29%

MANIPULATED – PAYMENT SCREENING

Insurance Benchmark  AML Analytics are excited to announce the launch of a new Insurance Benchmark on 1 March 2022. Created specifically from the monthly sanction screening system test results of insurance firms around the globe, Insurance Benchmark testing will be a simple way for an insurance firm to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of its sanction screening system each month and then compare its scores to the aggregated scores of insurers around the world.

AML Analytics is the only company in the world to offer a sanction screening system performance benchmarking solution to the insurance market and the Insurance Benchmark will be our first industry specific benchmark. Monthly Insurance Benchmark customer screening system scores will be published at both Control and Manipulated level for customer screening systems.

Insurance firms subscribing to our Insurance Benchmark service are able to measure their own sanction screening performance and then compare its scores to the aggregated scores of insurers around the world using the Insurance Benchmark scores in Analyser Online.

 

 

Asia Benchmark  AML Analytics also offers an additional Benchmark score to customers in Asia called the Asia Benchmark. Asia Benchmark scores are available at both Control and Manipulated level for customer screening systems and transaction screening systems.

Financial institutions subscribing to our Asia Benchmark service are able to measure their own sanction screening performance and then compare it specifically to their peers in Asia using the Asia Benchmark average scores in Analyser Online.

Control and Manipulated Explained

Control tests are created by using records exactly as they appear on sanction lists and without making any changes to these names. We refer to these datasets as Control tests which are designed to test the pure matching capability of a system. A Control test may include unchanged primary names and aliases of individuals, entities vessels, aircraft, countries, territories and BICs (Business Identifier Codes) on sanction lists.

Manipulated tests include records that have been changed using algorithms from the way they appear on sanction lists in order to copy how a criminal might change their name or to emulate mistakes made at data entry level. Using Manipulated data in tests will test the fuzzy logic matching capabilities of a sanction screening system.  It is normally harder for a sanction screening system to hit against records in a Manipulated test than in a Control test.