AML investigations will always require human analysis
Today, many anti-money laundering (AML) programs are dictated by how their transaction monitoring systems function. Regulators are focusing more on analyzing the transaction monitoring rules and models, validating their effectiveness, and auditing alert response procedures and incidents. Indeed, it seems as if many AML programs are specifically designed to revolve around these technologies. Institutions have hundreds of analysts whose job is solely to investigate the alerts that these technologies generate. They have auditors and quality assurance teams who must validate the work of these analysts. Institutions dedicate some of their smartest “quant” type analysts to tuning, improving, and validating the models that these technologies enforce.
“Due to the complexity of AML risk assessments, Booz Allen asserts that human analysts will always be required to make qualitative judgments.”
Financial institutions are spending more and more of their budgets on transaction monitoring technology. Additionally, these institutions have scaled up their internal technology staff, and have brought in contractors to support these systems. Significant investments have also been allocated to implementation, hosting, support, and training for these systems.
