Risk methodology technology
Your risk methodology, executed consistently and evidenced automatically. The Risk Assessment module applies the factors, weighting and thresholds your firm has approved, links each rating to the evidence behind it, and keeps every version of the methodology that has ever produced a rating.
- Risk factors, weighting and thresholds configured to your approved methodology.
- Every rating linked to the evidence and data that produced it.
- Overrides permitted where your policy allows, recorded where it matters.
- Methodology versioned, so historic ratings remain explainable.
Why risk ratings are hard to defend
Most firms can produce a customer risk rating. Far fewer can reproduce it. When the rating is calculated in a spreadsheet, or in a system whose configuration has been changed several times since, the firm cannot show what the methodology looked like on the day the rating was set, or which data it was applied to.
Overrides are the second weak point. A sound methodology needs a route for accountable human judgement to depart from the calculated outcome. What makes that defensible is not the override itself but the record of who made it, on what basis, with what approval, and whether the pattern of overrides is reviewed. Where overrides are untracked, the effective methodology is not the documented one.
The third problem is disconnection from the rest of due diligence. A rating produced in isolation from ownership, screening and the purpose of the relationship becomes a label rather than a control, and the downstream measures it is supposed to drive end up set by habit instead.
What the risk assessment engine does
The methodology belongs to your firm. The platform executes it consistently and makes it inspectable.
Configurable risk factor model
Customer type, geography, product and channel, ownership complexity, screening exposure and any further factors your methodology defines, configured rather than hard-coded.
Weighting and thresholds you control
Factor weighting and the thresholds that separate risk bands are set to your approved model, with changes made as governed configuration rather than as code releases.
Evidence linked to every factor
Each factor value carries the data and source that produced it, so the rating can be explained factor by factor rather than as a single opaque score.
Ratings driven by real case data
The assessment consumes resolved ownership, screening outcomes, nature of business and relationship purpose from the same case, so the rating reflects what was actually found.
Governed overrides
Where your policy permits departure from the calculated rating, the override captures the reason, the approver and the supporting rationale, and is reportable as a population.
Trigger and change handling
Where a change is detected in ownership, screening exposure or other configured factors, the affected customer can be re-rated and routed for review rather than waiting for a calendar date.
Methodology versioning
Every version of the factor model, weighting and thresholds is retained, and each rating records the version that produced it.
Downstream workflow integration
The rating drives the level of due diligence, review frequency and escalation applied in the workflow, so the assessment is a control rather than a label.
Portfolio reporting
Distribution across risk bands, movement between bands, override volumes and factor contribution reported across the customer population.
Controls and evidence
A risk assessment is only as good as the record that supports it. These are the properties that make a rating hold up on review.
Reproducible ratings
A historic rating can be reconstructed from the methodology version, the factor values and the source data recorded at the time.
Attributed overrides
Departures from the calculated outcome record who, when, why and with what approval, and can be reviewed as a set to test whether the methodology needs recalibration.
Governed configuration change
Changes to factors, weighting or thresholds are versioned and attributed, so a supervisor can see when the model changed and what changed.
Evidence retained with the rating
The rating does not stand alone; it carries the ownership, screening and relationship information behind it.
Population-level testing
Because factor values are structured, the model can be tested against the portfolio rather than sampled by hand.
What firms use it to achieve
Firms use the engine to make their approved methodology the one that actually operates.
- The documented methodology and the applied methodology are the same thing.
- Each rating can be explained to internal audit or a supervisor factor by factor.
- Overrides become a governed, measurable feature of the model rather than an untracked workaround.
- Risk-relevant change moves a customer's rating when it happens, not at the next scheduled review.
- Calibration is evidence-led, because factor behaviour across the population is visible.
Implementation considerations
- The firm's business-wide risk assessment should drive the factor model; configuring a customer risk model in isolation from it creates a gap that is quickly found on review.
- Agree who owns methodology change and how it is approved before configuration, because the platform will version whatever governance you apply.
- Data availability constrains factor design; a factor with no reliable source produces noise rather than risk sensitivity.
- Decide your override policy explicitly, including which roles may override and in which direction.
- Plan for recalibration from the start, including what evidence would justify a change.
Related practitioner guidance
The methodology thinking behind this module is set out in our practitioner guidance.
Customer risk assessment: a practical CDD framework
Factor design, weighting, overrides, calibration and independent testing.
Enhanced due diligence
What a high-risk rating should actually trigger, and how it is evidenced.
Purpose and intended nature of the business relationship
Capturing relationship purpose in a form the risk model can use.
KYC trigger events
The changes that should cause a customer to be reassessed.
Frequently asked questions
Does Agora set our risk methodology?
No. The methodology is your firm's, approved through your own governance. The platform configures and executes it, and keeps the record that shows it was applied consistently.
Can the calculated rating be overridden?
Where your policy permits it. Overrides capture the reason, the accountable approver and the rationale, and can be reported across the population so the pattern is reviewable.
Are historic ratings affected when the methodology changes?
No. Each rating records the methodology version that produced it, so historic decisions remain explainable against the standard in force at the time.
Next step
Test the engine against your own methodology
Bring your factor model, weighting and a handful of real customer scenarios, and we will walk through how the assessment would be configured and what the resulting evidence looks like.