😎 Fully Charged! 🚀 Ready to launch!
yolaine.dev © 2025 Yolaine LTD • Built by Tracy Ngot • Solo AI Consultant
Fintech
How I Automated KYC/AML Checks for a Crypto Exchange (Cut 80% Processing Time) Real case study: Building AI-powered KYC/AML automation for a fintech client. Document verification, risk scoring, and compliance reporting - all automated.
A mid-sized crypto exchange was hemorrhaging money on manual compliance. Their KYC team was processing 200+ applications daily, each taking 45 minutes of manual work. Compliance delays meant frustrated customers and lost revenue.
The challenge: European crypto regulations require strict KYC/AML verification, but manual processes couldn't keep up with demand.
The result: Automated 80% of the verification pipeline, reducing average processing time from 45 minutes to 9 minutes while improving compliance accuracy.
Here's exactly how I built it.
The Manual Process (That Was Bleeding Money)
Before automation, every customer verification required:
Document collection : Upload ID, proof of address, bank statementsManual review : Compliance officer checks document authenticityRisk assessment : Manual scoring based on geography, transaction patterns, politically exposed persons (PEP) listsAML screening : Cross-reference against sanctions lists, adverse mediaDecision making : Approve, reject, or flag for further reviewReporting : Generate compliance reports for regulators
Time per application: 45 minutes average
Daily volume: 200+ applications
Team cost: 6 full-time compliance officers at €60K/year each
Customer frustration: 24-48 hour approval times
Annual cost of manual KYC: €360K in salaries + €200K in lost customers due to delays = €560K yearly
The Automated Solution Architecture
Stage 1: Intelligent Document Processing
Problem : Manual document verification was the biggest bottleneck.
Solution : AI-powered document analysis using computer vision + OCR.
Tech stack:
Google Cloud Document AI for OCR and data extractionCustom TensorFlow model trained on ID document patternsImage processing pipeline for quality checks and fraud detection
Implementation:
// Document verification types interface DocumentVerificationResult { status : 'approved' fintech KYC AML compliance document verification risk scoring automation
Tracy Yolaine Ngot Founder at Yolaine LTD
Tracy is a seasoned technology leader with over 10 years of experience in AI development, smart technology architecture, and business transformation. As the former CTO of multiple companies, she brings practical insights from building enterprise-scale AI solutions.
|
'rejected'
|
'review_required'
;
extractedData ?: ExtractedDocumentData ;
fraudScore : number;
consistencyScore : number;
confidence : number;
reason ?: string;
}
interface ExtractedDocumentData {
documentType : 'passport' | 'driving_license' | 'national_id' ;
fullName : string;
dateOfBirth : string;
documentNumber : string;
expiryDate : string;
issueDate : string;
nationality : string;
}
// Document verification pipeline
async function verifyDocument ( uploadedFile : File ) : Promise < DocumentVerificationResult > {
// Stage 1: Quality checks
const qualityScore = await assessImageQuality ( uploadedFile );
if ( qualityScore < 0.7 ) {
return {
status: 'rejected' ,
reason: 'Poor image quality' ,
fraudScore: 0 ,
consistencyScore: 0 ,
confidence: 0
};
}
// Stage 2: Document type detection
const docType = await classifyDocument ( uploadedFile );
// Stage 3: OCR and data extraction
const extractedData = await extractDocumentData ( uploadedFile , docType );
// Stage 4: Fraud detection
const fraudIndicators = await detectFraudPatterns ( uploadedFile , extractedData );
// Stage 5: Cross-validation
const consistencyScore = validateDataConsistency ( extractedData );
const confidence = calculateConfidenceScore ( qualityScore , consistencyScore , fraudIndicators );
return {
status: confidence > 0.8 ? 'approved' : confidence > 0.5 ? 'review_required' : 'rejected' ,
extractedData ,
fraudScore: fraudIndicators ,
consistencyScore ,
confidence
};
}
// ML processing (Python integration)
async function extractDocumentData ( file : File , docType : string) : Promise < ExtractedDocumentData > {
// Call Python ML service for OCR processing
const response = await fetch ( '/api/ml/extract-document' , {
method: 'POST' ,
body: createFormData ( file , docType ),
headers: { 'Content-Type' : 'multipart/form-data' }
});
if ( ! response . ok ) {
throw new DocumentProcessingError ( 'OCR extraction failed' );
}
return await response . json ();
}
95% accuracy in data extraction (vs 99% manual, but 10x faster)Automatic fraud detection for common forgery patternsReal-time processing instead of manual queue
Stage 2: Intelligent Risk Scoring Problem : Manual risk assessment was subjective and inconsistent.
Solution : AI-powered risk scoring engine with real-time data sources.
Geographic risk (FATF country classifications)PEP screening (Politically Exposed Persons)Sanctions list checking (OFAC, EU, UN lists)Adverse media screening (negative news associations)Transaction pattern analysis (if existing customer) // Risk assessment types interface CustomerRiskData { customerId : string; fullName : string; dateOfBirth : string; country : string; nationality : string; occupation ?: string; estimatedIncome ?: number; }
interface RiskFactors { geographic : number; pepStatus : number; sanctions : number; adverseMedia : number; transactionPatterns : number; }
interface RiskAssessmentResult { overallScore : number; riskLevel : 'low' | 'medium' |
Stage 3: Automated Decision Engine Problem : Manual decision-making created bottlenecks and inconsistency.
Solution : Rule-based decision engine with AI assistance for edge cases.
Low risk (score 0-30) : Auto-approveMedium risk (score 31-70) : Auto-approve with enhanced monitoringHigh risk (score 71-85) : Flag for human reviewCritical risk (score 86-100) : Auto-reject // Decision engine types interface KYCDecisionResult { decision : 'auto_approved' | 'approved_with_monitoring' | 'human_review' | 'auto_rejected' ; confidence : number; reasoning : string[]; nextActions : string[]; reviewRequired : boolean; complianceRecord : ComplianceRecord ; }
interface ComplianceRecord { decisionId : string; timestamp : string; riskFactors : RiskFactors ; documentVerification : DocumentVerificationResult ; decisionReasoning : string[]; reviewerRequired ?: string; }
// Main decision engine
Stage 4: Real-Time Compliance Reporting Problem : Manual reporting to regulators was time-consuming and error-prone.
Solution : Automated compliance reporting with audit trails.
Real-time dashboard for compliance teamAutomated regulatory reports (monthly, quarterly)Audit trail generation for all decisionsAlert system for high-risk patterns
Implementation Timeline & Challenges
Week 1-2: Infrastructure Setup
Set up Google Cloud Document AI
Built document upload and processing pipeline
Created secure data storage with encryption
Challenge faced: Document AI struggled with non-EU ID formats.
Solution: Trained custom models on client-provided document samples.
Week 3-4: Risk Scoring Engine
Integrated with sanctions list APIs (Dow Jones, Thomson Reuters)
Built PEP and adverse media screening
Created risk scoring algorithms
Challenge faced: API rate limits on sanctions list checking.
Solution: Implemented intelligent caching and batch processing.
Week 5-6: Decision Engine & Integration
Built automated decision logic
Integrated with existing customer database
Created audit logging and compliance reporting
Challenge faced: Existing system integration complexity.
Solution: Built API gateway for gradual migration.
Week 7-8: Testing & Compliance Review
Tested with 500+ historical applications
Compliance team review and approval
Regulatory sandbox testing
Results & ROI
Processing Speed Improvement
Before: 45 minutes average per applicationAfter: 9 minutes average (80% reduction)Daily capacity: Increased from 200 to 800+ applications
Cost Savings
Reduced staff: 4 compliance officers to 2 (retained for edge cases)Annual savings: €240K in salariesIncreased revenue: €180K annually from faster customer onboardingTotal annual benefit: €420K
Accuracy & Compliance
Document verification accuracy: 95% (vs 99% manual)Risk assessment consistency: 100% (vs variable manual)Audit compliance: 100% with complete decision trailsFalse positive rate: Reduced from 15% to 8%
Customer Experience
Approval time: 24-48 hours → 10 minutes (for auto-approved cases)Customer satisfaction: +40% improvementApplication completion rate: +25% (less abandonment)
Lessons Learned & What I'd Do Differently
What Worked Well
Phased rollout: Started with low-risk applications, gradually expandedHuman oversight: Kept humans in the loop for complex casesCompliance-first approach: Worked closely with legal/compliance teamAudit trails: Built comprehensive logging from day one
What I'd Improve
Better training data: Would collect more diverse document samples upfrontFeedback loops: Would build automated model retraining based on human reviewsMulti-language support: Would plan for international expansion earlierAPI redundancy: Would implement backup providers for critical data sources
Regulatory Considerations
Explainable AI: Ensured all decisions could be explained to regulatorsData privacy: Implemented GDPR-compliant data handlingAlgorithm bias: Regular testing for demographic bias in decisionsHuman oversight: Maintained human review for high-risk cases
Technical Architecture Deep Dive
Data Flow Customer Upload → Document Processing → Risk Assessment → Decision Engine → Compliance Reporting
Security Measures
Encryption: All PII encrypted at rest and in transitAccess controls: Role-based access with audit logsData retention: Automated deletion per regulatory requirementsPenetration testing: Quarterly security audits
Scalability
Microservices architecture: Each component independently scalableCloud-native: Built on Google Cloud for automatic scalingAPI-first design: Easy integration with future systemsQueue-based processing: Handles traffic spikes gracefully
Industry Impact & Compliance This automation approach aligns with evolving EU regulations:
MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) : Supports upcoming compliance requirementsAMLD6 (6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive) : Automated suspicious activity detectionGDPR compliance : Privacy-by-design data handling
Want Similar Results? This KYC automation system is now serving 3 other fintech clients with similar results. The framework is adaptable to:
Traditional banks (customer onboarding)Investment platforms (investor verification)Lending platforms (borrower assessment)Insurance companies (policy holder verification)
Implementation Options Option 1: Full Custom Build (8-12 weeks)
Complete solution tailored to your compliance requirements
Integration with existing systems
Custom risk scoring models
$25K-$45K investment
Option 2: Rapid Deployment (4-6 weeks)
Pre-built components adapted to your needs
Standard integrations
Proven risk models
$15K-$25K investment
Option 3: Consultation & Strategy (2 weeks)
Automation assessment and roadmap
Compliance review and recommendations
Technical architecture planning
$5K-$8K investment
Ready to automate your compliance processes? Book a free KYC automation audit and I'll analyze your current process and identify automation opportunities.
Every day you wait, you're losing money on manual processes that could be automated. The fintech landscape is moving fast - automated compliance is becoming table stakes, not a competitive advantage.
The future of fintech compliance is automated, auditable, and always-on.
'high'
|
'critical'
;
factors : RiskFactors ;
recommendation : 'approve' | 'review' | 'reject' ;
reasoning : string[];
}
// Risk scoring engine
async function calculateRiskScore ( customerData : CustomerRiskData ) : Promise < RiskAssessmentResult > {
// Parallel execution of risk checks
const [
geographicRisk ,
pepStatus ,
sanctionsCheck ,
adverseMediaCheck ,
transactionPatterns
] = await Promise . all ([
assessCountryRisk ( customerData . country ),
checkPepLists ( customerData . fullName , customerData . dateOfBirth ),
checkSanctionsLists ( customerData ),
scanAdverseMedia ( customerData . fullName ),
analyzeTransactionHistory ( customerData . customerId )
]);
const riskFactors : RiskFactors = {
geographic: geographicRisk ,
pepStatus: pepStatus ,
sanctions: sanctionsCheck ,
adverseMedia: adverseMediaCheck ,
transactionPatterns: transactionPatterns
};
// Weighted risk calculation with business rules
const riskWeights = {
geographic: 0.2 ,
pepStatus: 0.3 ,
sanctions: 0.4 ,
adverseMedia: 0.1 ,
transactionPatterns: 0.2
};
const totalRisk = Object . entries ( riskFactors ). reduce (
( total , [ factor , score ]) => total + score * riskWeights [ factor as keyof RiskFactors ],
0
);
return {
overallScore: totalRisk ,
riskLevel: categorizeRisk ( totalRisk ),
factors: riskFactors ,
recommendation: generateRecommendation ( totalRisk , riskFactors ),
reasoning: generateReasoningExplanation ( riskFactors )
};
}
// Business logic for risk categorization
function categorizeRisk ( score : number) : RiskAssessmentResult [ 'riskLevel' ] {
if ( score <= 0.3 ) return 'low' ;
if ( score <= 0.7 ) return 'medium' ;
if ( score <= 0.85 ) return 'high' ;
return 'critical' ;
}
// Compliance-aware recommendation engine
function generateRecommendation (
overallScore : number,
factors : RiskFactors
) : RiskAssessmentResult [ 'recommendation' ] {
// Hard rules for sanctions and PEP
if ( factors . sanctions > 0.8 ) return 'reject' ;
if ( factors . pepStatus > 0.9 ) return 'review' ;
// Score-based decision
if ( overallScore <= 0.3 ) return 'approve' ;
if ( overallScore <= 0.85 ) return 'review' ;
return 'reject' ;
}
// External API integrations
async function checkSanctionsLists ( customerData : CustomerRiskData ) : Promise <number> {
try {
const response = await fetch ( '/api/sanctions/check' , {
method: 'POST' ,
headers: { 'Content-Type' : 'application/json' },
body: JSON . stringify ({
name: customerData . fullName ,
dateOfBirth: customerData . dateOfBirth ,
country: customerData . country
})
});
const result = await response . json ();
return result . riskScore ;
} catch ( error ) {
console . error ( 'Sanctions check failed:' , error );
// Return high risk score if check fails for compliance safety
return 0.9 ;
}
}
async
function
makeKYCDecision
(
documentScore : DocumentVerificationResult ,
riskScore : RiskAssessmentResult ,
customerData : CustomerRiskData
) : Promise < KYCDecisionResult > {
// Validate inputs
if ( ! documentScore . extractedData || documentScore . confidence < 0.5 ) {
return createRejectionDecision ( 'Insufficient document verification' );
}
// Calculate combined confidence
const combinedConfidence = ( documentScore . confidence + ( 1 - riskScore . overallScore )) / 2 ;
// Decision matrix based on risk and confidence
let decision : KYCDecisionResult [ 'decision' ];
let reasoning : string[] = [];
let reviewRequired = false ;
if ( riskScore . overallScore <= 0.3 && documentScore . confidence > 0.9 ) {
decision = 'auto_approved' ;
reasoning . push ( 'Low risk profile with high document confidence' );
await executeAutoApproval ( customerData );
}
else if ( riskScore . overallScore <= 0.7 && combinedConfidence > 0.8 ) {
decision = 'approved_with_monitoring' ;
reasoning . push ( 'Moderate risk requiring enhanced monitoring' );
await executeApprovalWithMonitoring ( customerData , riskScore );
}
else if ( riskScore . overallScore <= 0.85 ) {
decision = 'human_review' ;
reasoning . push ( 'Risk level requires human assessment' );
reviewRequired = true ;
await flagForHumanReview ( customerData , riskScore . factors );
}
else {
decision = 'auto_rejected' ;
reasoning . push ( 'Risk level exceeds acceptable thresholds' );
await executeAutoRejection ( customerData , riskScore . factors );
}
// Generate compliance record
const complianceRecord : ComplianceRecord = {
decisionId: generateDecisionId (),
timestamp: new Date (). toISOString (),
riskFactors: riskScore . factors ,
documentVerification: documentScore ,
decisionReasoning: reasoning
};
return {
decision ,
confidence: combinedConfidence ,
reasoning ,
nextActions: generateNextActions ( decision , riskScore ),
reviewRequired ,
complianceRecord
};
}
// Auto-approval workflow
async function executeAutoApproval ( customerData : CustomerRiskData ) : Promise <void> {
try {
// Parallel execution of approval tasks
await Promise . all ([
generateComplianceRecord ( customerData , 'auto_approved' ),
sendWelcomeEmail ( customerData ),
enableTradingPermissions ( customerData . customerId ),
logDecisionForAudit ( customerData , 'auto_approved' ),
notifyCustomerSuccess ( customerData )
]);
console . log ( `Auto-approved customer: ${ customerData . customerId } ` );
} catch ( error ) {
console . error ( 'Auto-approval failed:' , error );
// Fallback to manual review if automation fails
await flagForHumanReview ( customerData , { error: 'automation_failure' });
}
}
// Enhanced monitoring setup
async function executeApprovalWithMonitoring (
customerData : CustomerRiskData ,
riskScore : RiskAssessmentResult
) : Promise <void> {
await Promise . all ([
enableTradingPermissions ( customerData . customerId ),
setupEnhancedMonitoring ( customerData . customerId , riskScore . factors ),
schedulePeriodicReview ( customerData . customerId , '90_days' ),
logDecisionForAudit ( customerData , 'approved_with_monitoring' ),
sendConditionalWelcomeEmail ( customerData )
]);
}
// Human review flagging with context
async function flagForHumanReview (
customerData : CustomerRiskData ,
riskFactors : any
) : Promise <void> {
const reviewCase = {
customerId: customerData . customerId ,
priority: calculateReviewPriority ( riskFactors ),
context: generateReviewContext ( customerData , riskFactors ),
suggestedActions: generateSuggestedActions ( riskFactors ),
deadline: calculateReviewDeadline ( riskFactors )
};
await Promise . all ([
addToReviewQueue ( reviewCase ),
notifyComplianceTeam ( reviewCase ),
logDecisionForAudit ( customerData , 'flagged_for_review' ),
sendPendingNotificationToCustomer ( customerData )
]);
}
// Error handling and fallback mechanisms
class KYCDecisionError extends Error {
constructor (
message : string,
public readonly customerData : CustomerRiskData ,
public readonly stage : string
) {
super ( message );
this . name = 'KYCDecisionError' ;
}
}
function createRejectionDecision ( reason : string) : KYCDecisionResult {
return {
decision: 'auto_rejected' ,
confidence: 1.0 ,
reasoning: [ reason ],
nextActions: [ 'Customer can appeal decision' , 'Provide additional documentation' ],
reviewRequired: false ,
complianceRecord: {
decisionId: generateDecisionId (),
timestamp: new Date (). toISOString (),
riskFactors: {} as RiskFactors ,
documentVerification: {} as DocumentVerificationResult ,
decisionReasoning: [ reason ]
}
};
}
Back to Blog
Tags
Learn more about Tracy
Related Articles
Ready to Transform Your Business with AI?
Let's discuss how AI agents and smart technology can revolutionize your operations. Book a consultation with our team.
Get Started Today
How I Automated KYC/AML Checks for a Crypto Exchange (Cut 80% Processing Time) | Tracy Yolaine Ngot | Yolaine LTD | Yolaine LTD
