A sanctions check now costs €0.39. Here is the engineering that made the cut possible

Same products, same coverage, same evidence PDFs. No volume threshold, no subscription requirement, no expiry date. No monthly platform fee — pay only for the checks and reports you run.

Most screening products carry the cost structure of the era they were built in: licensed datasets resold per lookup, manual review steps, sales-led contracts, and infrastructure sized for institutional buyers. The price of a check reflects all of that before it reflects the check.

ScreenVeritAI was built the other way around. The pipeline is automated end-to-end — ingestion of official sources, entity normalisation, matching, and evidence generation run without a human in the loop. This year our engineering team finished a round of optimisation work on the analytical core of that pipeline: the stages that review matches, expand queries and assemble evidence now deliver better results at a lower unit cost than the architecture they replaced.

When your unit cost falls, you have two options: keep the difference as margin, or pass it on. We are doing two things instead of one — lowering the prices of the two highest-volume checks, and reinvesting part of the headroom in additional validation layers on the analytical stages, because in compliance work a cheaper check that is also a less reviewed check would be a bad trade. The cut is funded by the cost structure, not by a marketing budget. That is why it has no expiry date.

Two things stayed exactly where they were, for opposite reasons.

Coverage and evidence. A Quick Check still runs against 67 official screening sources — 11 major sanctions jurisdictions, 40 additional lists, 16 criminal watchlists — and still produces a point-in-time evidence PDF you can hand to an auditor. Cutting the price by cutting the scope would have been the easy version of this announcement. It is not this one.

Report prices. Full Search (€5.90) and the Deep Research Report (€14.90) answer a different question than a check does. A check tells you whether a name appears on a list. The reports tell you who the counterparty is: aliases and transliterations, AI review of every candidate match, adverse media, and a written, citation-backed dossier. Their comparison class is analyst-produced due diligence — which, bought as a service, routinely runs to hundreds of dollars per report. At €14.90 they are already priced for adoption.

The screening market has three price leagues, and it is worth being honest about all three.

Raw name-matching APIs can cost a few cents per call at volume — but they return list hits, typically sanctions-only, without PEP and criminal-watchlist domains and without evidence documents. Pay-as-you-go screening tools comparable to a Quick Check cluster around $0.55 or more per check. Subscription tools reach lower effective per-check prices, but only against a monthly commitment sized in the hundreds or thousands of checks. And analyst-grade due diligence — the class our reports compete in — starts at several hundred dollars per report.

At €0.39 for a three-domain check with an evidence PDF and no commitment, ScreenVeritAI now sits below the pay-as-you-go field while including more in each run. That position is a direct output of the pipeline economics described above — which is precisely why we are comfortable publishing it.

ScreenVeritAI supports compliance review and due diligence documentation. Final decisions remain with your team.