Chudovo develops anti-money laundering software to help institutions create controls for the relevant regulatory frameworks that govern the way they operate. Regulatory frameworks will vary according to jurisdiction, licenses held, and product categories – all of which are established during the discovery process.
Chudovo develops FATF-compliant software for jurisdictions. It is the responsibility of the institution to be certified and compliant with the relevant regulations.
Timelines depend on scope, regulatory environment, and the integration landscape. The ranges below are typical for AML projects that Chudovo delivers.
| Project Phase | Typical Timeline |
| Discovery and Regulatory Scope | Two to four weeks |
| Architecture and Proof of Concept | Three to six weeks |
| Focused AML MVP | Three to six months |
| Enterprise AML Platform | Six to twelve months, or longer for complex deployments |
| Data Migration and Parallel Validation | Depends on data volume and legacy system complexity |
For enterprise deployments, Chudovo builds in a shadow-mode phase where the new platform operates in parallel with the existing system and the compliance team compares results before full cutover.
AML projects range from focused MVPs for early-stage institutions and RegTech startups through enterprise platforms for banks with high transaction volumes and multi-jurisdiction operations.
| MVP | Enterprise Platform |
| Batch transaction monitoring | Real-time monitoring at scale |
| Predefined detection rules | Configurable rules engine |
| Basic customer risk score | Dynamic multi-factor risk scoring |
| Alert list | Full case management |
| Manual watchlist upload | Automated data-provider integrations |
| Basic reporting | SAR and STR workflows |
| Limited user roles | Granular access with segregation of duties |
| Single business unit | Multi-entity and multi-jurisdiction support |
| Standard audit log | Full decision lineage |
| Single-server processing | Event-driven distributed architecture |
Off-the-shelf AML platforms work for many institutions, but some organizations reach a point where the platform’s constraints limit their compliance program or business model. The comparison below shows what changes when an institution moves from off-the-shelf to custom.
| Off-the-Shelf | Custom AML Software |
| Standard workflows | Organization-specific workflows |
| Limited rule configuration | Custom detection logic |
| Vendor-defined integrations | Integration with existing infrastructure |
| Recurring licensing costs | Ownership of the developed solution |
| Restricted data model | Custom transaction and entity models |
| Vendor release schedule | Independent product roadmap |
| Possible vendor lock-in | Greater architectural control |
Custom development in AML often means a hybrid approach — building custom transaction monitoring or case management layers while integrating licensed sanctions, PEP, adverse media, and identity data providers. Chudovo scopes each project against the client’s real needs and existing vendor relationships.