EyesClear

Overview

EyesClear is a financial-crime compliance suite for institutions handling sanctions and name-matching alerts, with an on-premise or private-cloud Platform and a separate browser-based Investigations service. Its strongest case is for banks that want documented analyst decisions and AI processing kept within their own environment; it is not a real-time payment-screening system.

The two tools address different needs. The Platform organizes incoming alerts into cases, while Investigations screens people and companies against public records and returns findings with source quotations. Investigations can be used independently or feed an existing case system, so it offers a low-commitment way to conduct checks without deploying the Platform.

Key features

Alert and case workflow

The Platform gathers alerts into one queue, collects evidence, drafts case narratives, and sends decisions to analysts for sign-off. Cases do not close automatically: an analyst reviews, edits, and signs before action. That human checkpoint supports accountable decision-making, but it still depends on analyst capacity and does not automate the final disposition.

Public-record investigations

Investigations checks people and companies against public records and returns results with source quotes. A screening consumes one credit. This is useful when an analyst needs evidence to assess a match; it is not a substitute for the payment screening that raises an alert in the first place.

Integrations and audit trail

Platform connectors cover SWIFT, ISO 20022, MQ, Kafka, databases, and files for CRM, transaction, risk, and KYC data. Central records of evidence, case history, decisions, and user activity create an audit trail, a practical strength for institutions that need to reconstruct how a case was handled.

Data handling

The Platform and its AI inference run inside the bank’s environment, without sending customer data or model inference to an external cloud or third-party vendor. Investigations is different: the hosted service sends a subject’s name and derived search terms to public sources and the language models it uses. It does not send customer files, transactions, or alerts. Buyers should assess those two data paths separately.

Pricing

EyesClear uses a freemium model. EyesClear Investigations is free for financial institutions and their regulators; a new account includes five screening credits, with one credit used per screening. That makes it suitable for occasional checks or an initial evaluation, but the included allowance is small for sustained screening. EyesClear Platform has custom pricing; request a demo. The published terms do not state a seat limit or a trial period.

Platforms

The Platform is self-hosted, deployed on premises or in a private cloud, while Investigations runs as a hosted web service. The split suits institutions that want to keep Platform data and AI processing in their own environment, while still using a browser service for public-record research. Investigations can run without deployment or integration.

Who it's for

EyesClear is best suited to financial institutions and regulators that need to resolve sanctions or name-matching alerts, preserve an auditable case record, and retain analyst approval over actions. Investigations also fits teams that need occasional public-record checks without setting up a larger system. Institutions seeking real-time payment screening should look elsewhere.

Pros and cons

Pros: Platform AI inference stays in the bank’s environment, which suits institutions with strict data-handling requirements.

Pros: Evidence, case history, decisions, and user activity are centrally recorded, supporting review of how cases were handled.

Pros: Investigations can be used in a browser on its own or connected to an existing case system, avoiding a deployment requirement for that service.

Cons: EyesClear does not screen payments in real time; it handles alerts generated by a customer’s screening platform.

Cons: Investigations starts with five credits, and each screening uses one, limiting the free allowance to a handful of checks.

Cons: Investigations sends names and derived search terms to public sources and its language models, unlike the Platform’s in-environment processing.

Alternatives

Compare AML compliance software if you want to survey the wider category. Marble Case Manager is worth considering for an open-source, self-hosted option with a real-time Decision Engine and community support. SAS Visual Statistics may suit buyers focused on enterprise-scale statistical modeling on SAS Viya; it is paid and offers a free trial.

Zenoo is another paid option, with Android, iOS, web, and API platforms. Lucinity Platform may suit buyers looking for a modular stack with pay-as-you-go, upfront, or committed-usage pricing; a free trial is available. Nasdaq Verafin is a paid option for financial institutions, with product information available by request.

NICE Actimize is a paid alternative with demo or expert consultation by request. Quantexa AML offers a paid option across API, self-hosted, and web platforms, with pricing by request. Temenos Wealth Front Office is another paid option, available via API, self-hosted, and web platforms.

Verdict

Choose EyesClear if your institution needs an auditable, analyst-led workflow for sanctions and name-matching alerts, particularly when keeping Platform data and AI processing inside its own environment matters. Its independent Investigations service also offers a straightforward route to public-record checks. Look elsewhere if real-time payment screening is essential, or if five free screening credits will not meet your team’s needs.