Diligent.ai
Category
Fintech
Identity & screening
Use cases
AML & financial crime
KYB
AI agents that resolve AML alerts and merchant-risk reviews end-to-end, sitting on top of the sanctions, PEP, and adverse-media screening providers you already use.
Diligent's agents sit on top of screening providers like LexisNexis, World-Check, and Dow Jones, and close the alert instead of flagging it: sanctions, PEP, and adverse-media false positives resolved, merchant risk reviewed from a business's own web presence and registry filings, documents checked against policy. Diligent doesn't want to build a back-office or store client data; Forest is the access and audit layer it runs inside, so a decision that closes an alert is logged like any other action.
Diligent closes the alert. Someone still has to prove it was closed correctly.
A resolved sanctions or PEP alert is a decision with real consequences. Diligent makes the call; Forest is where that call sits on the customer's case, with a reason and a timestamp a regulator can review later.
An agent that queries your data without storing it still needs somewhere to act.
Diligent was built to avoid touching client systems directly, which today means falling back to a human forwarding information by hand. Forest is the access layer that lets the agent read what it needs and write its decision back, without either side storing data it doesn't have to.
Merchant risk, sanctions, documents: three checks, one case.
A single onboarding can trigger a merchant-risk review, a sanctions screen, and a document check, each from a different tool. Forest is where all three land on the same customer record, instead of three logs an analyst has to reconcile by hand.
Full automation is a choice a team earns, not a default.
Diligent can run under analyst review until a team trusts the pattern, then close cases on its own. Forest's audit trail is what lets a team make that call with evidence, tracking how the agent's decisions held up before flipping the switch.
Resources & install
Diligent's agents sit on top of screening providers like LexisNexis, World-Check, and Dow Jones, and close the alert instead of flagging it: sanctions, PEP, and adverse-media false positives resolved, merchant risk reviewed from a business's own web presence and registry filings, documents checked against policy. Diligent doesn't want to build a back-office or store client data; Forest is the access and audit layer it runs inside, so a decision that closes an alert is logged like any other action.
Frequently asked questions
What does Diligent actually do?
Resolves AML alerts end-to-end: sanctions, PEP, and adverse-media false positives closed rather than flagged, merchant risk assessed from a business's own web presence, customer documents checked against policy.
Does Diligent replace the screening provider?
No. It sits on top of the provider a team already uses, LexisNexis, World-Check, Dow Jones, and others, and resolves what that provider flags instead of leaving it to an analyst.
Does a Diligent decision need a human to review it?
That is configurable. Diligent can run with analyst review on every case, or close a case fully on its own once a team is comfortable with the pattern; either way, the decision needs somewhere to be logged.
Is there a native Forest connector for Diligent?
Not yet. Diligent is API-only, with no case-management interface of its own; a Forest custom action calling that API is the current path, until a packaged connector ships.
What does Forest add on top of what Diligent already does?
The access and audit trail. Diligent queries client data without storing it and closes the alert; Forest is where that closed alert becomes a logged decision on the same case as the rest of the customer's record.
Do you have more questions?
Book time with a Forest expert.