IDV Risk

A brief guide on how to interpret the IDV Risk

For every verification, bronID automatically calculates the IDV Risk (Identity Verification Risk). This score is derived from the information collected and processed by bronID during the verification process.

Please note that the IDV Risk is not the same as Customer Risk and should not be used as a substitute. It is intended to help you make quick decisions by reviewing a single indicator that summarises all the relevant data points. However, you should always review the detailed verification results before deciding whether to onboard an organisation.

The IDV Risk for organisations is based on the following factors:

  • Jurisdiction of incorporation or establishment
  • Jurisdiction of all entities in the ownership structure
  • Jurisdiction that issued identity documents for UBOs
  • Type of organisation
  • Complexity of the organisation (e.g. number of ownership levels)
  • Indicators of ownership obfuscation (e.g. circular ownership)
  • Adverse findings related to owners or controllers
  • Years of operation
  • PEP screening results
  • Sanctions screening results
  • Watchlist screening results
  • Other relevant parameters

How the IDV Risk Score is determined:

The final IDV Risk Score represents the maximum risk level observed across all the individual parameters assessed. This approach ensures that even a single high-risk indicator (e.g. sanctions match or complex ownership structure) appropriately elevates the overall risk rating, helping to flag verifications that require closer attention.

IDV Risk Score values:

  • Low
  • Low-Medium
  • Medium
  • Medium-High
  • High

KYB – Default Risk Parameters

KYB Default risk parameters
Entity type
  • Sole TraderLow
  • PartnershipLow Medium or Medium
  • Private CompanyLow Medium
  • Public CompanyLow Medium
  • Association – Incorporated EntityLow Medium
  • Association – Unincorporated EntityMedium
  • SMSFLow
  • Superannuation Fund – regulated, non-SMSFLow Medium
  • Registered Managed Investment SchemeLow Medium
  • Unregistered Managed Investment SchemeLow Medium
  • Bare TrustMedium
  • Charitable TrustMedium
  • Discretionary TrustMedium
  • Hybrid TrustMedium
  • Testamentary TrustMedium
  • Unit TrustMedium
  • Trust – OtherMedium
  • Gov body – DomesticLow
Discrepancy between submitted entity type and entity type in gov. register Risk increased to higher risk of the two
Jurisdiction See Jurisdiction Risk Table
PEP lists No Low, Yes High
Sanctions No Low, Yes High
Other watchlists No Low, Yes High
Adverse media No Low, Yes Med-High
Indicators for obfuscation of ownership details (e.g., circular ownership) No Low, Yes Med-High
Removal of regulation information due to failure to lodge returns No Low, Yes Med-High
Entity status is not active (e.g., External Administration) No Low, Yes Med-High or High
Entity complexity Low Low, Medium Medium, High High
Discrepancies in the attached documents (trust deeds, deeds of variation, partnership agreement) No or non-material Low, Yes and material Medium and Med-High, Yes and material/significant High
Discrepancies in the registry data No or non-material Low, Yes and material Medium and Med-High, Yes and material/significant High
Still require support?
Contact support