Counterparty Due-Diligence Report, No Signup

The problem this solves

You have a single counterparty to vet, often under time pressure, and the usual path runs through a subscription, a procurement cycle, and an account setup before you can pull one report. That overhead does not match a one-off need. When a relationship manager forwards a new trading partner, or a deal lands on your desk that has to clear screening before it moves, you need a dossier on one entity, not an annual contract.

The OilFlow counterparty dossier is built for exactly that case. It is a one-time, fixed-fee report on a single counterparty, with no account and no subscription required.

What the capability does

For a flat $25, OilFlow runs its full seven-step KYC screen on one counterparty and emails the resulting report. The seven steps are:

1. Sanctions and PEP screening against eight lists, including a politically exposed persons check.
2. Company registration verification.
3. Licence checks across 235 jurisdictions.
4. Asset confirmation.
5. Trade references.
6. Digital footprint review.
7. Broker-scam pattern analysis.

The output is a single dossier covering these seven areas, delivered to your inbox. There is no platform to log into and no recurring billing.

Two handling rules matter for how you read the report:

• Steps that cannot be confirmed from public sources are reported as pending. The dossier does not guess or fill gaps. If a registration, licence, or asset cannot be verified from available public information, that step is flagged as pending rather than passed or failed.
• AI-generated sections ship marked DRAFT. Any section produced by automated generation arrives labelled DRAFT and is intended for review by independent counsel before you rely on it.

How a team would use it

A compliance officer who needs one dossier orders the report, receives it by email, and works through it section by section. The screening areas map to the categories that already structure most onboarding files: identity and registration, sanctions and PEP exposure, licensing, assets, references, and risk signals such as broker-scam patterns and digital footprint anomalies.

Treat the pending flags as your task list. A pending status tells you which facts public sources could not confirm, so you know exactly where to direct follow-up requests to the counterparty or to a licensed local agent. This keeps the gaps visible instead of buried.

Treat the DRAFT sections as a starting draft, not a finding. Route them to independent counsel for review before they enter a formal file or support a decision. The DRAFT marking exists so that automated text is never mistaken for verified, signed-off conclusions.

For a relationship manager or developer evaluating the tool, the no-signup model means you can commission a real dossier on a real counterparty to see the output before any wider commitment, rather than judging it from a description alone.

Honest scope: what it does not do

Be clear about the boundaries:

• It is one counterparty per report. This is a single-entity dossier, not a portfolio screen or an ongoing monitoring feed. A new counterparty means a new report.
• It is point-in-time. The dossier reflects what could be confirmed when it was run. Sanctions lists, registrations, and licences change. There is no subscription, so there is no continuous re-screening built into this product.
• Pending is not a clearance. A pending step means public sources could not confirm that item. It does not mean the item is clean or that no risk exists. You still need to close those gaps yourself.
• DRAFT sections are not legal conclusions. They require review by independent counsel. The report does not replace your own legal or compliance judgment.
• It does not make a decision for you. The dossier compiles screening results across the seven steps. Whether to onboard, decline, or escalate the counterparty remains your call, governed by your own policies and your regulator's expectations.

This explainer states only the capabilities in the product brief. We make no claims about accuracy rates, false-positive rates, certifications, or how many reports have been produced, because those are not facts we are asserting here.

Relevant public regulatory frameworks

The screening areas align with established public standards that compliance teams already work to:

• FATF Recommendation 10 sets out customer due diligence expectations, including identifying and verifying the customer, understanding ownership, and applying risk-based scrutiny. The registration, sanctions, PEP, and risk-pattern steps support work in these areas.
• OFAC sanctions programs require screening counterparties against applicable sanctions lists and avoiding prohibited dealings. The sanctions and PEP step contributes to that screening; it does not replace your obligation to apply the specific list obligations relevant to your jurisdiction.
• UCP 600, the ICC rules for documentary credits, frames much of trade finance practice. Confirming the standing, licensing, and legitimacy of a trade counterparty supports the broader diligence around transactions conducted under these rules.

Using this dossier supports your obligations under these frameworks. It does not by itself satisfy them. The legal responsibility for meeting your regulatory duties stays with your organization, which is why pending steps need closing and DRAFT sections need counsel review before you rely on them.