Financial Crime Monitoring System Evaluation Form
Evaluate how effectively the financial crime monitoring system supports detection, alert handling, investigations, reporting, integrations, usability, and performance.
Respondent & Organization Context
Respondent Role / Title
*
Organization Name
*
Industry / Segment
*
Banking
Insurance
Payments
Fintech
Investment Management
Cryptocurrency
Other
System Name / Version Evaluated
*
Deployment Type
*
Cloud
On-Premise
Hybrid
Years Using the System
Monitoring Coverage & Data Sources
Which channels are monitored?
*
Transactions
Customer onboarding
Account activity
Payments/transfers
Sanctions screening
Watchlist matching
Login/device behavior
Case management
Alerts from external sources
Other
Primary data sources used
*
Core banking system
Payment processor
KYC/identity platform
Watchlist/sanctions provider
Device and session logs
Case management system
External alert feeds
Data warehouse or lake
Other
Geographic coverage
*
Please Select
Single country
Multiple countries within one region
Multiple regions
Global
Other
Supported monitoring mode
*
Batch
Real-time
Both batch and real-time
Other
Detection Effectiveness Evaluation
Detection accuracy
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Relevance of alerts
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Speed of alert generation
*
Slow
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Fast
10
1 is Slow, 10 is Fast
False positive rate
*
High
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Low
10
1 is High, 10 is Low
False negative concern
*
High concern
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Low concern
10
1 is High concern, 10 is Low concern
Overall effectiveness
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
Excellent
5
1 is Poor, 5 is Excellent
Alert Review & Investigation Workflow
Alert routing effectiveness
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Queue prioritization method
*
Risk-based
Oldest first
Manual analyst prioritization
Rules-based priority
Other
Investigator workload fit
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Case creation handoff quality
*
1
2
3
4
5
Workflow step assessment
*
Rows
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Alert creation
1
2
3
4
Review
5
6
7
8
Escalation
9
10
11
12
Disposition
13
14
15
16
Closure
17
18
19
20
Escalation handling effectiveness
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Compliance, Reporting & Audit Support
Usefulness of reporting outputs
*
1
2
3
4
5
Completeness of audit logs
*
Incomplete
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Complete
10
1 is Incomplete, 10 is Complete
Regulatory reporting support
*
Fully supported
Partially supported
Not supported
Not sure
Evidence export capability
*
Export with filters
Export all records
Export limited fields only
Not available
Other
Historical records access and report customization
*
Rows
Poor
Fair
Good
Very Good
Excellent
Searchability of historical records
21
22
23
24
25
Retention period visibility
26
27
28
29
30
Report customization options
31
32
33
34
35
Integrations, Usability & Performance
Which systems does the solution integrate with?
*
Core banking system
CRM system
Watchlist/sanctions provider
Data warehouse
Email system
SIEM
Other internal tools
Ease of configuration
*
Very difficult
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Very easy
10
1 is Very difficult, 10 is Very easy
Dashboard usability
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
Search and filter usefulness
*
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Excellent
10
1 is Poor, 10 is Excellent
System response time
*
Slow
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Very fast
10
1 is Slow, 10 is Very fast
Overall implementation effort
*
Very low effort
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Very high effort
10
1 is Very low effort, 10 is Very high effort
Key Feedback & Outcome
Main strengths
Top improvement priorities
Critical issues encountered
Overall satisfaction
*
1
2
3
4
5
Follow-up contact email
example@example.com
Submit Evaluation
Should be Empty: