MioTech

The removal test leaves an empty database, because the data this company sells largely does not exist in reported form. Natural language processing extracts environmental, social and governance signals from more than 12,000 public sources across over 800,000 companies, and a knowledge graph builds cross-references between company, supply chain, shareholding and investment data so correlations can surface what disclosure does not state. A global asset manager's head of sustainable investing describes the distinguishing capability precisely as using artificial intelligence to gather and assess unstructured data sets.

The customer framing is the reliable guide and it places the output upstream of judgement rather than in place of it, with a global asset manager describing the data as valuable inputs to fundamental research and to the development of its own scoring system, so analysts retain the assessment. Real-time risk monitoring raises alerts for people to act on. Held at B because ratings and indexes are themselves conclusions that flow into allocation decisions, and nothing describes review, override or escalation where an automated rating moves capital.

One control is genuine and unusual: a major independent assurance body's verification services are integrated directly into the platform, so claims can be checked by a third party within the same workflow rather than taken on the vendor's word. The method is described rather than concealed, resting on a knowledge graph of cross-references and correlation across a stated source count.

Held at B because no accuracy, coverage completeness or rating validation figure is published, and environmental and governance ratings are known to diverge substantially between providers, which makes an unexplained methodology a material gap for an institution allocating against it.

Around 2,000 clients are served, roughly half publicly listed companies using the software for regulatory disclosure. The strongest signal is that several major institutions are simultaneously shareholders and customers, including a global bank, a global asset manager and a credit ratings agency, alongside a sovereign wealth fund and a regional broker.

A named global head of sustainable investing states publicly that the data feeds her firm's fundamental research and will help develop its own proprietary quantitative scoring system, which is integration into an investment process rather than a subscription. Four funding rounds closed within twelve months, and partnerships include a major assurance body and a Hong Kong bank.

No boundary statement was located, and the shareholder structure makes the question unusually pointed. Several of the largest investors are also customers and direct competitors of other customers, and the platform observes what each institution researches, screens and holds.

Nothing states whether client activity informs the knowledge graph, whether portfolio or supply chain data submitted by one corporate is visible in analysis sold to its investors, or what separation exists between the data business and its institutional shareholders.

No data protection agreement, retention schedule or subprocessor list was located. Personal data exposure is lower than at consumer-facing vendors since subjects are companies, and the platform does hold client portfolio holdings, supplier relationships and know your customer material on private companies, none of whose handling terms are published.

No attestation, certification, trust centre or enumerated framework was located. Global banks, a ratings agency and a sovereign wealth fund have each conducted diligence sufficient to invest as well as buy, so assurance exists privately at a high standard, and nothing is published for other institutions to rely on.

Named regimes span two continents and the software is built to produce compliance output against them: the Hong Kong exchange's disclosure guide, the Chinese asset management association's green investment guidelines, the securities regulator's move from voluntary to mandatory disclosure for listed companies, European deforestation-free product requirements for exporters, and European product carbon footprint standards taking effect from 2026.

Half its clients use the platform for regulatory disclosure. Held at B because the company holds no licence itself and its ratings and indexes are not described as operating under any benchmark or rating agency regime.

The bias risk here is structural and unaddressed. Ratings inferred from public sources systematically favour companies that generate more observable material, which in practice means larger, listed, English-reporting firms with investor relations functions, while smaller or domestically reporting companies appear worse simply by being less visible.

That is the same attention bias recorded elsewhere in this index for media-derived signals, and it matters more here because the company's entire premise is operating where disclosure is nascent. No analysis of rating distribution by company size, language or reporting maturity is published, and no methodology transparency accompanies the scores.

No guarantee, indemnity or correction process was located. The affected party is the rated company, which may be scored poorly on inferred data it never submitted and cannot see, with consequences for its cost of capital and index inclusion. Nothing describes whether a company is notified of its rating, can review the inputs behind it, or has any route to correct a factual error in the underlying extraction.

The data chain is characterised more concretely than most, with a stated count of more than 12,000 public sources, coverage of over 800,000 public and private companies, and named categories including supply chain, shareholding, investment and other alternative data sets, plus an identified assurance partner supplying verification.

Held at B because individual sources are not named, no model or provider is identified behind the language processing, and for ratings that influence capital allocation the provenance of specific inputs is what a buyer would need to assess.

The corporate platform connects businesses with their suppliers, subsidiaries and investors in one environment, which is the right architecture for supply chain emissions work where the data sits with third parties rather than the reporting entity. Assurance verification is embedded, and a consumer application extends reach through a regional messaging platform. Held at B because no portfolio management, order management or research system used by its financial customers is named, and delivery into those workflows is not described.

No hosting provider, region selection or residency commitment was located, which is a notable gap for this company specifically. It operates across mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore, jurisdictions with materially different and in China's case strict data export rules, and it holds corporate and supply chain data for clients that are majority non-mainland while processing extensive mainland company information.

No pricing, packaging or basis of charge was located across a range spanning data feeds, ratings, indexes, corporate reporting software and consulting. The company describes a deliberate shift from consultant-based services to software, which is a commercial model change customers would want quantified, and no figures accompany it.

Buy side, sell side and issuer are all served: banks issuing green bonds, sovereign and mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, family offices, sell-side research departments and private bank relationship managers, plus corporates and governments. Functional range runs from data and ratings through real-time risk monitoring to indexes, carbon accounting, energy tracking and climate risk mapping. Coverage is anchored in China and Hong Kong with offices across four cities, around 70 percent of clients outside mainland China, and stated expansion into South Korea and Southeast Asia.