scorecard
Corlytics
Atlas score
3.5
Best for
- Multi-regulated compliance teams that need enforcement-calibrated risk prioritisation rather than equal-weight rule coverage
- Brokers preparing FCA SMCR accountability frameworks that require documented links between enforcement signals and internal policy updates
- Legal and compliance teams at mid-to-large broker groups where policy document management is a material operational cost
Not for
- Firms that only need regulatory horizon scanning without enforcement analytics - CUBE is better positioned for that use case
- Smaller brokers that cannot absorb the implementation overhead of the integrated intelligence-plus-policy-management suite
- Brokers needing reporting, surveillance, or archiving tools rather than regulatory intelligence
Pros
- Enforcement action analytics go beyond rule text to show which provisions generate the most FCA, CySEC, ASIC, and MAS enforcement activity - compliance teams can prioritise by actual regulatory risk, not equal-weight rule coverage
- 2023 ClauseMatch acquisition adds collaborative policy document editing, version control, obligation tagging, and approval workflows - intelligence is connected directly to internal policy update actions
- Closed loop architecture: a regulator Dear CEO letter or enforcement action triggers a workflow in ClauseMatch that surfaces which internal policies reference the cited rule and routes them for review
- FCA final notices, CySEC administrative measures, ASIC enforcement actions, and MAS sanctions are core input data - coverage of the four primary broker-relevant regulators in a single system
- Serves financial institutions, regulators, and law firms - a client base that reflects depth in primary source regulatory content, not simplified summaries
Cons
- All Corlytics website pages returned 403 errors during research; public product information is not accessible - positioning post-ClauseMatch integration and current module bundling require direct vendor confirmation before procurement
- Pricing fully undisclosed; no tiers or anchor fees are available - budget estimation is not possible without a vendor engagement
- Less relevant for firms that only need horizon scanning without enforcement analytics depth - CUBE may be a better fit at lower cost for straightforward regulatory change tracking
- ClauseMatch policy management workflow adds operational value but also implementation and change management overhead; smaller compliance teams may not have the capacity to operationalise the full integrated suite
- DMCC and UAE-native enforcement data coverage versus EU/UK/ASIC/MAS is not confirmed; UAE-primary operators should verify before purchase
Pricing teardown
Pricing not publicly disclosed — contact vendor for a quote.
Pricing fully undisclosed; quote-based. Corlytics website returned 403 errors during research; pricing inferred from market positioning. No published tiers.
Editorial commentary
Who they are
Corlytics was founded in Dublin in 2013 with a focus that differentiates it from CUBE and other regulatory intelligence platforms: rather than primarily tracking what regulators are publishing, Corlytics focuses on what regulators are actually doing - enforcement actions, fines, censures, and the policy interpretations that emerge from supervisory decisions. Its regulatory risk intelligence engine ingests enforcement action data from securities regulators, banking supervisors, and financial conduct authorities globally, classifies actions by rule type, firm category, and conduct type, and maps the enforcement patterns to the rules and internal policies that produced the violations. This gives compliance teams a data-driven view of where regulators are actually applying their rule books - which provisions generate the most enforcement activity, which firm types are most frequently cited, and what control failures are most commonly identified in final notices and decision documents. In 2023 Corlytics acquired ClauseMatch, a London-based policy and procedure management platform, adding the workflow layer needed to turn intelligence into internal document updates. Corlytics website pages returned 403 errors during research; content draws on press releases, public ClauseMatch acquisition announcements, and analyst coverage.
Architecture
Corlytics operates two integrated layers following the ClauseMatch acquisition. The intelligence layer ingests, classifies, and analyses regulatory publications and enforcement actions using AI-powered document processing, mapping each action to the applicable rule set and building quantitative risk scores by conduct area and jurisdiction. The policy management layer (ClauseMatch) provides collaborative document editing, version control, obligation tagging, and approval workflows for internal policies, procedures, and controls documentation. The connection between the two layers is the compliance workflow: when Corlytics identifies that a regulator has updated its interpretation of a rule (through an enforcement action, Dear CEO letter, or supervisory guidance), ClauseMatch surfaces the internal policies that reference that rule and routes them for review and update. This closed loop from regulatory signal to internal policy change is the core architecture proposition. The combined platform serves financial institutions, regulators, and law firms - a client base that reflects the platform’s depth in primary source regulatory content rather than simplified regulatory summaries.
Pricing
Pricing is fully undisclosed. No tiers or anchor fees are available publicly. Corlytics operates on an enterprise subscription model; deal scope typically reflects jurisdiction count, policy document volume, and whether the intelligence layer, the ClauseMatch policy management layer, or the integrated suite is purchased.
Regulatory fit
Corlytics’s enforcement analytics provide direct regulatory risk intelligence for the frameworks most relevant to CySEC, FCA, ASIC, and MAS-regulated brokers. FCA final notices and decision notices against broker-dealers and investment firms are core input data - understanding which FCA enforcement actions cite COBS, SYSC, or PRIN rule breaches and what the common control failures are gives compliance teams risk-calibrated priorities rather than equal-weight coverage of all obligations. CySEC sanctions and administrative measures for CIF licence holders provide equivalent intelligence for Cyprus-regulated operations. ASIC enforcement actions under the Corporations Act inform Australian compliance teams. MAS enforcement actions under the Securities and Futures Act cover Singapore entities. MAR and MiFID II enforcement by ESMA-member NCAs is covered. The ClauseMatch integration means that the policy mapping and obligation tagging capabilities operate across all these jurisdictions within the same workflow tool. For FCA SMCR purposes, the documented linkage between regulatory enforcement signals and internal policy updates supports Senior Manager accountability frameworks.
Verdict
SOLID for compliance teams in multi-regulated broker groups that need to go beyond rule text monitoring and understand actual regulatory enforcement priorities. The ClauseMatch policy management integration transforms intelligence into actionable internal documentation workflows. Less relevant for firms that only need horizon scanning without the enforcement analytics depth - CUBE may be a better fit at lower cost for straightforward regulatory change tracking.