Silent Eight: Iris 7 screening, investigations and governed AI decisions

The operating users include screening analysts, investigators, money-laundering reporting officers, compliance leaders and quality-assurance teams. Technology and model-risk staff support integration, validation and governance. Silent Eight also provides training for transformation leaders and boards.[17]

The overlay architecture connects screening, monitoring and case-management environments. Its runtime sequences investigative steps, tool and API calls, retries and workloads; a context layer brings together internal records and external intelligence. Decisions and their supporting records return to the institution’s operating systems. The public architecture explains these mechanisms but does not supply an endpoint reference or a certified connector matrix for named banking platforms.[13]

Silent Eight states that it does not provide sanctions watchlist data. Its screening tools work with the sanctions, PEP, adverse-media and internal lists the customer selects. Those source subscriptions and their permitted use therefore remain distinct from the decisioning software.[15]

Silent Eight does not publish a general subscription tariff, per-alert price or standard minimum commitment in the product and cost materials reviewed. Commercial scope is discussed with its team.[15][20]

A commissioned Forrester study provides a specific cost example. Based on one interview with a risk-advisory firm serving a customer base of three million, its model assumes combined platform, licence and advanced-support fees of US$190,000, US$340,000 and US$420,000 in years one to three, plus a US$200,000 vendor implementation payment. Internal project effort is modeled separately. Screening volume and support scope affect the model. These figures describe that study’s assumptions; they are not a current price list or a quotation for another institution.[16]

Silent Eight describes an implementation approach that includes observing frontline teams and designing the system with them. That matters for adjudication: the configuration must reflect how the institution investigates, documents and escalates cases, as well as how it receives alerts.[26]

The screening suites provide a policy editor and simulator for testing rule and decision changes before deployment. Live alerts can then be sampled for analyst quality review. This creates a practical progression from policy configuration to testing and monitored use, rather than treating automated closure as permission to skip validation. Entity resolution and Case Manager should be scoped explicitly when included in the screening design.[3]

Custom Build starts with the institution defining investigative workflows, then configures and trains agents to evaluate signals and evidence against those procedures. Production decisions use the defined authority limits and escalation paths. This allows a specialised investigation to be automated without assuming that every customer requires a bespoke agent or replacement of its entire compliance platform.[12]

The Forrester interviewee reported an approximately ten-week implementation involving data setup, API integration, testing and tuning with Silent Eight. Its model includes a data analyst, API manager and supervisor, analyst testing and pre-launch training. This is an individual deployment example, not a standard delivery commitment.[16]

Silent Eight publishes ongoing platform support across deployment models. Public pages do not specify support hours, severity-based response targets, uptime credits or a standard recovery commitment.[14][20]

Training is available virtually, in person or in hybrid form, including focused sessions, half-day and full-day formats and board briefings. Topics cover detection, investigation, transaction monitoring, case documentation, QA sampling, model validation and AI governance. Sessions can be tailored to the institution’s cases, policies and risk appetite; the published training page does not state that these services are included in every licence.[17]

The architecture describes institution-set policy boundaries, approval limits and escalation rules, with QA sampling, overrides and exception handling. Retained decision records contain assessed data, the policy logic, reasoning and outcome. Versioning, performance monitoring and reproducibility support model-risk review. Changes to reasoning are described as governed updates. Published security controls include access restrictions, environment isolation, audit logging and encryption.[13]

The FAQ describes investigator feedback, regulatory updates and risk signals as inputs to model improvement; it also discusses pooling anonymised datasets across institutions and regular human review and recalibration. These statements do not establish a universal promise that customer information is never used for training. The public material does not specify a complete model inventory, customer-level training opt-out, or case-data retention and deletion schedule. Those permissions require the applicable customer agreement.[15]

The privacy policy updated on 2 July 2026 identifies the Singapore operator and covers website use, recruitment and business-contact information. It should not be read as a complete data-processing agreement for a bank’s customer files or investigative case data.[18]

This is a software and service relationship. The institution retains policy ownership, governance and decision authority under every deployment model. Product claims about auditability or regulatory readiness do not confer a financial-services authorisation on the customer.[14]

Silent Eight’s current history records Standard Chartered deployment in 2018, the HSBC partnership in 2021 and the Iris 7 launch in 2025. It also records a US$40 million Series B in March 2022 led by TYH Ventures, with HSBC Ventures and existing investors participating. That is a historical funding event, not a current revenue or valuation figure.[21]

Operator

Silent Eight Pte. Ltd.

Service scope

Iris 7 screening, financial-crime investigation and policy-governed decisioning; customer and payment screening suites, transaction-monitoring investigation, specialist CDD and trade-surveillance agents, risk data and case management.

Customer types

Banks; Financial institutions; Financial intermediaries; Risk-advisory firms

Delivery

Managed service; Hosted; On premises; Hybrid

Pricing publication

Not disclosed

Headquarters

Singapore

Platforms

Iris 7; Customer Screening Suite; Payment Screening Suite; Transaction Monitoring Suite; Risk Data Manager; Case Manager; Iris 7 Custom Build

Integrations

APIs for risk data; Screening systems; Transaction-monitoring systems; Case-management systems; SWIFT MT; ISO 20022 MX; ACH; SEPA; Fedwire

Pricing scope

No general tariff published. The commissioned Forrester study contains use-case-specific cost assumptions, not a current quotation.

Implementation

Workflow design, data and API setup, policy configuration, simulation, testing and monitored deployment; customer-cloud, managed and on-premises responsibility splits are documented.

Support

Ongoing platform support and requested training; published contact routes include business enquiries, security disclosure and data protection. Hours and response targets are not publicly specified.

Permissions and regulatory scope

Financial-crime compliance software. Institutions retain policy, governance and decision authority; screening and reporting features do not transfer the customer’s regulatory responsibilities.

Provider metadata checked 21 Oct 2026Source 1Source 2Source 13Source 14Source 3Source 4Source 18Source 20Source 17Source 16Source 25Source 15Source 6Source 8Source 9Source 10Source 12Source 5Source 19

Transaction-monitoring documentation specifically describes pre-populating SAR templates from investigation evidence, transaction details, entities and decision narratives. The agent catalog also describes SAR, STR and CTR report preparation. These are preparation and decision-support capabilities; the reviewed material does not document a universal direct-filing connection to regulators.[5][2]

The Trade Surveillance Agent is the clearest published fit for a broker’s market-abuse investigations. It assembles trading context, evaluates behaviour and policy, and returns a reasoned outcome for review or escalation. Its public description does not give exchange coverage, trade-feed schemas or individual surveillance-scenario specifications, so it establishes the workflow rather than a complete market-coverage inventory.[10]