Exposure typically comes through the parties a firm deals with rather than the trade itself: investors and counterparties behind layered ownership structures, funds routed via offshore vehicles, and sanctions risk that reaches beyond the immediate client to beneficial owners and intermediaries. Market abuse and trade-based laundering add further monitoring obligations.

Screening should cover the investor, its beneficial owners, directors, intermediaries and counterparties against sanctions, PEP, watchlist and adverse media data. Entities are screened at onboarding and re-screened on an ongoing basis, so changes to sanctions regimes or negative news surface without waiting for the next periodic review.

Counterparty relationships often involve multiple jurisdictions and layered structures, so headline identity tells you little about actual exposure. A structured assessment combining ownership, jurisdiction, product and screening outcomes gives a consistent risk rating that determines due diligence depth and how closely the relationship is monitored.

Yes. Monitoring can be configured around the instruments and flows a firm handles, flagging patterns such as unusual settlement routes, transactions inconsistent with a client's stated strategy, or rapid movement between related accounts. Alerts reach investigators with counterparty and screening context already attached.

ZIGRAM connects screening, counterparty risk assessment, transaction monitoring and investigation in one workflow supported by global risk intelligence and ownership data, giving firms a clearer view of exposure across jurisdictions and the documentation regulators expect.