Entity & fraud resolution

Resolve the identity.
Investigate the connection.

Bring identity, ownership, transaction, and document evidence into the same review. Understand which records belong together, where they disagree, and what needs further investigation.

Discuss your investigation workflow Explore the examples

Connected evidence. Explicit boundaries. Your decision.

IDENTITY / RELATIONSHIPS / EVIDENCEILLUSTRATIVE

Supported links. Visible uncertainty.
Resolve the record before interpreting the relationship.

FROM EVIDENCE TO REVIEW

Identity & registry evidence
Financial relationships
Investigation context

THE QUESTION BEHIND THE WORKFLOW

A match is a starting point. Evidence makes it useful.

Names, addresses, accounts, and transaction descriptions can point toward a relationship without establishing one. Give investigators a connected view that preserves both the supporting evidence and the uncertainty.

Resolve the subject

Reconcile permitted identifiers and source records so the assessment concerns the right person or business.

Examine the relationships

Distinguish ownership, payment activity, declared associations, and candidate links rather than treating every connection alike.

Keep conclusions reviewable

Surface contradictions and missing evidence. A suspicious pattern is a reason to investigate, not proof of fraud.

EXPLORE THE EVIDENCE

A clearer view of
the question at hand.

Switch between practical examples to see the observation, supporting records, and questions that matter before reaching a conclusion.

ILLUSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REVIEW

Same address. Still two separate businesses.

Two business records share an address. Their legal identifiers differ and no ownership evidence has been supplied.

Questions for the review

Check whether the address is shared office space or a registered agent.
Review authorized ownership and registry evidence.
Keep the entities separate unless the evidence supports a merge.

THE RECORDS IN CONTEXT

01Business A: Legal identifier A-104
02Business B: Legal identifier B-829
03Observed overlap: Same registered address

REVIEWABLE FINDINGCandidate association · ownership unconfirmed

Fictional example. Evidence requirements and conclusions depend on the agreed workflow.

BUILD THE PICTURE

Bring the right evidence
into the same context.

Agree the sources, permissions, observation window, and required output for your product. Keep coverage limitations attached to the analysis.

Identity & registry evidence

Authorized applicant records, identifiers, registry responses, and ownership documents. Keep jurisdiction and validity dates.

Financial relationships

Accounts, payments, settlements, facilities, and relevant counterparties supported by the connected evidence.

Investigation context

Screening matches, contradictory documents, related-party observations, and prior findings within the permitted scope.

Source availability depends on the connection and authorized scope. A missing record is not evidence that the underlying activity or obligation does not exist.

Explore integrations

A DEFINED PATH THROUGH THE ANALYSIS

From a starting question
to a reviewable finding.

01
Scope
Identify the subject, permitted sources, and question being investigated.
02
Compare
Normalize records and compare candidate matches against identifiers, time, and contradictory evidence.
03
Resolve
Keep supported, review-required, and unresolved outcomes distinct. Preserve the reasons and references.
04
Review
Give the institution the findings and supporting evidence for its own decision and response.

The workflow supports your institution’s process. Agree responsibilities, output requirements, and review boundaries before connecting it to operational actions.

REVIEW PACKAGE / ILLUSTRATIVE

Entity & fraud resolutionEvidence stays
with the finding.

The assertionWhat relationship or identity finding is being proposed, and which records support it.

The uncertaintyWhat is missing, inconsistent, or insufficient to support a confident conclusion.

The historyThe observation window and the context needed to understand corrections or later evidence.

Institutional review and decision authority

BUILT FOR THE PEOPLE DOING THE REVIEW

An investigation with a visible evidence trail.

Bring the record comparison, relationship context, and unresolved questions into the review. Verification and investigation are included stages of the agreed Insights or Signal workflow.

Fraud & compliance

Review suspicious patterns and possible screening matches without turning similarity into guilt by association.

Credit teams

Avoid misattributed income, duplicated obligations, or misleading concentration measures caused by an incorrect link.

Data & operations

Bring ambiguous records into explicit review and keep source provenance close to downstream findings.

Discuss your investigation workflow

CONNECT THE NEXT QUESTION

One intelligence layer.
Connected work.

Foundational risk graph

Risk lives in the relationships.

Connect entities, transactions, accounts, and obligations to understand the financial context around a borrower.

Amlok Insights

Underwrite the whole ecosystem.

Connect the applicant to the people, accounts, income, obligations, and counterparties that shape the deal. Give business, consumer, and insurance teams the context to make a well-informed decision.

Amlok Signal

Risk keeps moving. Stay connected.

Follow changing cash flow, obligations, and financial relationships after the original decision. Amlok Signal connects new evidence to the underwriting baseline so your team can review what matters.

PLAN THE WORKFLOW

Questions worth
working through.

Explore API

Does a shared address establish common ownership?

No. An address can be shared for legitimate reasons. Ownership requires appropriate supporting evidence. The same caution applies to similar names and overlapping payment descriptions.

Does Amlok identify fraud automatically?

Amlok supports evidence analysis and investigation. A possible match, circular transfer pattern, or inconsistent document is not by itself proof of fraud. Your institution reviews findings and owns its actions.

Can private borrower graphs be linked across institutions?

Customer-private evidence remains within its authorized workspace and purpose. Public reference information does not authorize connecting private borrowers across institutions.

What happens to uncertain matches?

They remain unresolved or available for review, with the reason and relevant evidence. A plausible name completion or uncalibrated confidence value should not be treated as verified identity.

Is investigation a standalone product?

Verification and investigation are included stages of Insights or Signal within an authorized processing context. Agree the workflow and evidence requirements with the team.

CONTINUOUS RISK INTELLIGENCE

Keep up with riskas fast as it changes

A point-in-time decision does not need to become a blind spot for the life of the deal.

Talk to us Explore API

A barista handing a coffee to a customer across a wooden café counter, with pale brick walls and cool natural daylight.

Resolve the identity.Investigate the connection.