amlr.io vs ComplyAdvantage
ComplyAdvantage is first a data company; amlr.io is first an operations company. That difference decides which one you need. Facts checked against public materials in July 2026; their website is the authority on their product. Corrections: ops@amlr.io.
Choose ComplyAdvantage if...
- You need a proprietary, curated risk database: their continuously updated profiles of sanctions, PEPs and adverse media, assembled by a large data operation, go beyond what any official-lists-only approach can offer.
- You screen transactions or very high volumes through an API with enterprise SLAs.
- You are a bank or large fintech with procurement muscle, integration engineers, and the budget an enterprise data contract deserves.
Choose amlr.io if...
- You need screening embedded in a working system: hits arrive pre-assessed by AI, in a queue, attached to a case, feeding a risk score, ending in a dossier. Not an API response your team still has to operationalize.
- You value traceable sources: every match cites the official list, version and file hash it came from, which is what an inspector actually asks for.
- You are a lean team: one MLRO and a few analysts who need the registers, the reviews and the reporting handled in the same tool, without an integration project.
- You want a price you can read on a page, and the founder answering support.
| amlr.io | ComplyAdvantage | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A compliance operations system with screening built in | A risk-data and screening platform with case tooling |
| Screening data | 33 official public lists (OFAC, UN, EU, UK and national regimes), versioned and hash-verified, plus AI-assisted adverse media with cited sources | Proprietary curated database of sanctions, PEPs and adverse media |
| Data philosophy | Official sources, fully traceable to the publisher | Broader proprietary coverage, vendor-curated |
| Transaction monitoring | No | Yes |
| KYB onboarding, document collection | Yes, core of the product | Not their focus |
| AML registers, periodic reviews, board pack | Yes, core of the product | No |
| API | Not yet public | Yes, enterprise-grade |
| Pricing | Public flat plans from €399/month, screening included, no per-check fees | Enterprise, quote-based |
| Typical buyer | MLRO at a crypto or fintech firm, teams of one to twenty | Compliance and data teams at banks and scale-ups |
| Support | Founder-led | Enterprise support organization |
The coffee-table version
Their proprietary database is a genuine advantage we will not pretend away: a vendor-curated adverse-media profile can surface things official lists have not caught up to. Our counterargument is about what surviving an inspection actually requires: a hit you can trace to an official list version, adjudicated by a named human, inside a file with the rest of the evidence. That chain is what amlr.io builds, screening included, at a flat price. If you are big enough to want both, they are not mutually exclusive: plenty of firms run an enterprise data feed and still have nowhere to keep the department. That nowhere is us.
Decide with your own files.
Run the 14-day pilot next to whatever you use today and keep whichever wins.