AML, KYC & Financial Crime
F

Fincom

Fincom screens payments and customers against sanctions and watchlists using patented Phonetic Fingerprint technology, which converts a name into a mathematical representation of how it sounds rather than how it is spelled, so matching survives misspelling, unstructured formats, different alphabets and transliteration across 44 languages. An entity resolution engine with supervised machine learning weighs attributes such as date of birth, address and identifiers alongside the phonetic score.

Products cover payment screening across wires, ACH, instant payments and SWIFT, KYC and perpetual KYC screening, Verification of Payee and case management, with AML suites for financial institutions, trade finance and e commerce. Named banks include AgriBank, which reports false positives falling from 95 percent to between 3 and 5 percent, Cadence Bank and The National Bank of Indianapolis; Nasdaq Verafin is building Fincom's screening into its platform and Nasdaq Ventures led its Series B.

Last VerifiedOctober 2, 2026
Compare Fincom with other vendors
Founded
2017
Headquarters
Petah Tikva, Israel
Website
fincom.co
Categories
aml-kyc-financial-crime, compliance-and-surveillance, fraud-and-transaction-risk
Assessment

Capability Axes

Capability grades

15 of 15 axes rated · 8 graded A or B

AI Capability
AI Centrality
BB on AI CentralityThe models are the engine of a core capability, layered on a product that would still function without them as a rules or workflow system.
Vendor Published

Phonetic Fingerprint, the patented core, turns a name into a mathematical representation of its sound across 44 languages, a deterministic step rather than inference. Supervised machine learning in the entity resolution engine weighs date of birth, address and identifiers on top, and removing it would leave the patented engine standing.

Autonomy and Oversight Model
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside human judgment, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.
Vendor Published

Alerts go to compliance officers in the firm's case management system for adjudication, which fits a setting where blocking a payment or filing a report has statutory consequence. Thresholds, what proceeds when no alert fires and how a bank tunes sensitivity are not published.

Model Risk Management and Transparency
BB on Model Risk Management and TransparencyReal transparency mechanisms are published, such as per alert explainability, confidence scoring or split testing, without the validation package or supervisory mapping behind them.
Vendor Published

Published measures include alert rates cut from an industry 30 to 50 percent to about 5 percent and screening under 200 milliseconds, and every hit carries a score from phonetic distance and weighted attributes. The claim of no missed hits has no recall figure or method, and no validation package maps to SR 11 7.

Operational and Outcome Evidence
AA on Operational and Outcome EvidenceNamed customers with hard performance figures and enough method to test them.
Vendor Published

AgriBank, FCB reports false positive hits falling from 95 percent to about 8 percent, then to between 3 and 5 percent over the following months. That figure carries no method or baseline definition.

AI Safety and Data Stewardship
CC on AI Safety and Data StewardshipGeneral assurances that do not answer the question this axis asks, which is whether one customer’s data trains models serving its competitors. Unbounded cross client learning stated with no boundary grades here too.
Vendor Published

A deterministic phonetic core does not learn from customer traffic, so one bank's volume does not obviously sharpen a competitor's results. Whose adjudications label the supervised entity resolution layer, and whether tuning is per tenant, is not said.

Regulatory and Compliance
GLBA and Data Privacy Posture
CC on GLBA and Data Privacy PostureA standard privacy policy that covers the website rather than the service, or silence on a product that touches limited consumer data.
Vendor Published

The privacy policy dated February 2, 2022 covers the website only, names no subprocessors and sets out no individual rights. Customer names, dates of birth and identification numbers screened against watchlists, and the alert records that follow, get no described handling.

Security Certifications and Trust Center
CC on Security Certifications and Trust CenterA single footer line, or certifications asserted without being enumerated, which is weaker than naming them because it invites an assumption a buyer cannot check.
Vendor Published

Awards such as RegTech100 and FinCrimeTech50 placements fill the homepage, but they are not security credentials. Neither a SOC 2 report nor an ISO certification or trust portal is named.

Regulatory Status and Licensure
BB on Regulatory Status and LicensureThe regulatory position is clearly stated and appropriate to the product, with part of the verification left to the buyer.
Vendor Published

Screening is organized around OFAC sanctions obligations, with Verification of Payee and readiness for the 2026 Nacha mandate offered as products. Naming the rules served is a clear supplier position, though no register entry or filing channel stands behind it.

AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
CC on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureResponsible artificial intelligence committed to in policy language with no evaluation behind it, on a product whose bias surface is modest.
Vendor Published

Transliteration from Arabic, Cyrillic or Chinese yields many valid spellings, so false positives fall hardest on people with non Latin names, and phonetic matching eases that burden. Such matching is product design, not governance: false positive rates by name origin and a model sign off process are unpublished.

AI Liability and Recourse
CC on AI Liability and RecourseMechanisms that enable challenge, such as audit trails and source traceability, with nothing standing behind the output and no route for the person affected.
Vendor Published

Officer review before an outcome is final lets a wrong match be cleared and the payment released. Someone whose payment is held over a name resemblance is not told why and is given no route to suppress a recurring false match, and nothing stands behind the output.

Integration and Deployment
Model Supply Chain Disclosure
BB on Model Supply Chain DisclosureSubstantial partial disclosure, or a chain that is structurally short: an explicit in house build, on premise deployment, per customer instances, or zero retention at the model layer.
Vendor Published

In house builds of Phonetic Fingerprint and the entity resolution engine are described in technical detail, which keeps the model chain short. Watchlist data providers and hosting are not named, though list currency governs whether a screen is valid at all.

Core Systems and Integration Depth
AA on Core Systems and Integration DepthNamed integrations with the systems of record, core banking, policy administration, custodial or contact center platforms, verifiable in marketplace listings or public API documentation.
Vendor Published

Nasdaq Verafin announced in June 2025 that it is building the screening into its anti financial crime platform, and the real time compliance system connects to Finastra's real time payments platform through the Boost API. Microsoft, Cognizant and Delta Capita also appear on the partners page.

Deployment Model and Data Residency
CC on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyCloud only with nothing stated, which is the category norm.
Vendor Published

Data is maintained in the EU and the US according to a privacy policy written for the website, and no hosting provider, region choice or private option is stated for the screening platform. European and American bank customers often set strict rules on where screening data is processed.

Commercial
Commercial Transparency
CC on Commercial TransparencyNo price is published and engagement runs through a demo form, which is the norm in this index.
Vendor Published

Savings are what gets published, more than 80 percent lower screening operating cost and alert handling cut from eight minutes to 30 seconds, while price and billing dimension stay behind a contact form. Those figures size the business case, not the bill.

Institution and Segment Coverage
AA on Institution and Segment CoverageThe financial segments served are named and each carries its own maintained material, whether the coverage is broad or deliberately narrow.
Vendor Published

Separate AML suites for financial institutions, trade finance and ecommerce each carry their own material, with Cadence Bank, The National Bank of Indianapolis and Jefferson Bank among named banks. Payment coverage spans wires, ACH and SWIFT messaging, with perpetual KYC and Verification of Payee among the products.

Head to Head

Compared With

Most editorial comparisons pair two vendors the index assesses as direct competitors for the same buyer. Some pair vendors that are adjacent rather than rival, where the useful question is where one ends and the other begins. Each carries a verdict, the buyer conditions that favor each vendor, and a graded side by side.

Alternatives to Fincom

Vendors in the same categories as Fincom whose profiles look most alike, each with a line on what the product does. Similar is not the same: check that each one does the job you need. No vendor pays for placement.

NICE Actimize sells financial crime risk management to banks and financial institutions.

IMTF is a Swiss software company.

Trulioo verifies both people and businesses through one platform, reaching 195 countries by orchestrating more than 450 global and local data sources behind a single integration, and…

Chainalysis supplies blockchain data, software and research to banks, exchanges, crypto businesses, law enforcement and regulators, and states more than 1,500 customers.

ComplyAdvantage supplies the risk intelligence and screening layer that banks, fintechs, insurers and crypto businesses run their financial crime programs on, built entirely on proprietary…

Quantifind runs risk screening and investigations for financial crime through its Graphyte platform, resolving entities and scoring risk from billions of external sources covering sanctions…

The index publishes no overall score or ranking. See what we assess and the methodology.

Commercial

Pricing

Vendor-published figures are labeled as such. Figures labeled “Estimated” are derived from third-party sources and have not been confirmed by the vendor.

No pricing data has been verified for this vendor. Pricing information will be published here once confirmed through vendor disclosure or third-party estimation.

Contact us

Found a vendor we missed? Have feedback on the index? We’d love to hear from you.

AI FinTech Index

The AI FinTech Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in financial services. It holds 606 vendors across banking, lending, insurance, wealth, capital markets and financial crime compliance, each graded on the same 15 capability axes from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
October 17, 2026
The AI FinTech Index is an editorial reference, not a regulatory body. Vendor data is verified against published sources and public regulatory filings. Figures labeled “Estimated” have not been confirmed by the vendor. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI FinTech Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746