Regulatory reporting automation and continuous compliance monitoring
At an ASEAN bank, most of each month went on pulling data from 14 source systems, reconciling it and drafting returns. Checking data as it lands and generating each filing with every line traced to source cut its regulatory close from 28 days to 7. A UK challenger bank now tests 1,400 FCA controls against live evidence, not quarterly attestation.
What is regulatory reporting automation?
Regulatory reporting automation wraps the existing reporting process in rules and lineage. Source data is checked each time it loads, issues the rules can fix are fixed, and each return or disclosure is generated with every line traceable to its source record. The same evidence supports continuous compliance monitoring: each control is tested against live evidence, and a failed test goes straight to the control owner.
- An ASEAN bank cut its monthly close for Basel III, IFRS 9 and local returns in 6 markets from 28 days to 7.
- About 92% of its data-quality issues are now resolved automatically, before they reach the reporting team.
- A UK challenger bank moved 1,400 FCA controls from quarterly attestation to continuous or sub-quarterly testing; exceptions now close in a median 36 hours.
- A European manufacturer was CSRD-ready in about 11 months, with 1,200+ ESRS data points traced from source to disclosure.
Regulatory reporting and compliance, step by step
Connect sources and trace lineage
Data comes from the existing source systems; at the ASEAN bank it is staged through the bank's data warehouse, with no source-system changes. A lineage graph links the source data, through each transformation and calculation, to every line on every return, and the reporting team can query it.
Check data quality as it loads
Each source-system load triggers its quality rules in near real time, not in a month-end batch. The ASEAN bank runs about 4,200, covering reconciliations, cross-system checks and calculations such as risk-weighted assets and IFRS 9 staging. Issues the rules can resolve are fixed; the rest reach the data owner within minutes, with context.
Test controls against live evidence
Each control is written as a testable assertion with its evidence sources and test frequency. Evidence streams in from systems such as core banking, complaints and lending decisions, and each control is tested on its own cadence. A failed test opens an exception that cites the evidence and goes to the control owner.
Generate returns and disclosures
Filing templates and a deterministic calculation engine produce each return in the regulator's format, such as XBRL for Basel filings, with bank-specific adjustments held in a separate configurable layer. For CSRD, the manufacturer's platform produces the ESRS disclosures, with an auditor evidence pack assembled for each data point.
Submit and show the working
Filings go through the existing regulator portals with the bank's own credentials. Any line can be expanded to its source data, transformations and calculation logic, so auditors can follow the data flow without manual evidence gathering. At the manufacturer, year-end CSRD reporting became a review-and-narrative exercise.
People keep the judgement calls. Data owners fix the issues the rules can't, control owners resolve exceptions, and reviewers write the narrative. At the UK bank, freed compliance time went to recurring exceptions and emerging regulation. The ASEAN bank's reporting team was split into core reporting and regulatory change, and a typical regulatory update now takes 4 to 6 weeks to build in, not 4 to 6 months.
Results from 3 deployments
Every figure below comes from the case study it links to.
ASEAN Tier-1 Bank
Basel + IFRS Reporting
- 92% data-quality issues auto-resolved
- $3.1M annual external-spend reduction
UK Challenger Bank
RegTech Continuous Controls
European Manufacturer
ESG Reporting Automation
- 50% CSRD-readiness timeline reduction
The accelerators behind it
Pre-built accelerators do the work, configured to your documents, rules and systems. Delivery took 28 to 44 weeks in the case studies above.
Compliance Engine →
Continuous controls testing against regulatory frameworks.
Data Quality Auditor →
Continuous data-contract validation across pipelines.
Financial Close Accelerator →
Cuts month-end close from 10 days to 3 with task orchestration.
Data Governance Agent →
Catalog, lineage, PII and access policy automation.
Regulatory reporting and compliance: the questions buyers ask
How much faster is the regulatory close?
At an ASEAN bank, the monthly close for Basel III, IFRS 9 and local returns in 6 markets fell from 28 calendar days to 7, inside the CFO's target of under 10. Filings now reach each regulator with more time in hand, which has eased the late-cycle pressure that was driving errors.
Do we have to replace our reporting platform or source systems?
No. The ASEAN bank kept its existing reporting platform and wrapped each data feed, reconciliation step and output filing in an automation layer. Data is staged through its existing data warehouse, no source system had to change, and filings still go through the regulator portals with the bank's own submission credentials.
What does continuous compliance monitoring look like in practice?
Controls are tested automatically against evidence from the systems that produce it, instead of owners attesting each quarter. At a UK challenger bank, about 78% of 1,400 FCA controls are tested continuously and the rest on a set sub-quarterly cadence. The median time to resolve a control exception fell from several weeks to 36 hours, and a Consumer Duty update adding 28 controls took 3 weeks.
Will auditors and regulators accept it?
The first MAS inspection after go-live cited the ASEAN bank's reporting infrastructure as a positive, and its reporting-related external audit costs fell by about $3.1m a year. The first FCA supervisory engagement after go-live commended the UK bank's compliance infrastructure. The manufacturer's first CSRD report was filed on time with a clean opinion from its external auditor.
Does it work for ESG and CSRD reporting?
Yes. A European manufacturer covers 1,200+ ESRS data points, each defined with its data sources, calculation and evidence needs and fed from its environment, health and safety, HR, energy, procurement and finance systems. It was CSRD-ready in about 11 months, inside the CFO's 12-month target, and year-end reporting now takes weeks rather than months.
Where does the data stay?
In each organisation's own environment. The ASEAN bank's platform runs in its private cloud in its home-market data centre; each subsidiary's data stays in-country, and consolidated returns are built from attested local extracts. The UK bank's runs in its own cloud environment in London with full UK data residency, and the manufacturer's in its own cloud tenant in the EU.
How long does a deployment take?
Delivery took 28 weeks at the ASEAN bank, starting with 12 weeks of lineage mapping, and 32 weeks at the UK challenger bank, where building integrations to about 40 source systems took longest. The European manufacturer's CSRD platform took 44 weeks.
Get the MindMap capability deck
The platform, the accelerator library and how an engagement runs, in one deck. Our team emails it within one business day.
More use cases
KYC and account opening →
4 hrs onboarding at a UK challenger bank, down from 5 days
AML and fraud detection →
71% fewer AML alerts to analysts at an Indian public-sector bank
Insurance claims →
80% low-complexity UK motor claims settled straight through
See it running on your own process
A 20-minute walkthrough with the engineers who build these deployments: your documents, your systems, the accelerators running.