Our Resources

Crypto compliance, AML reviews, and Source of Wealth analysis are evolving quickly, but many compliance playbooks haven’t kept up. In this video series, Lukasz explains common misconceptions in crypto compliance cases and shares practical ways to analyse them clearly and defensibly. Designed for professionals working in compliance, risk, and financial crime.

A crypto-related transfer hits a bank account, say, €70k, and suddenly, a normal customer story can turn complicated. The tricky part is that the bank often sees just one line: exchange: bank + “big amount” What’s missing is the context that explains the case: where the funds came from, what happened inside the exchange, trades: capital gain, and whether anything is missing. In this clip, I walk through a simple, realistic example, John + a house purchase, and explain why teams end up with three outcomes: ✅ EDD, the right one ❌ blind rejection ❌ blind acceptance Question: Where do these cases usually get stuck for you - at hearing the word "crypto", data collection, the story, or documentation?

A crypto EDD situation we see all the time: HNWI onboarding. Not a “bad guy” story - just portfolio management, but the expectations around Source of Wealth documentation quality are much higher. This clip breaks down a simple example (Pierre) and why it’s the same EDD / SoW job, just a bigger ticket. Do you treat HNWI crypto onboarding differently from retail cases?

Most banks follow one of three playbooks for crypto cases, and two of them are shortcuts. In Clip #4 of my crypto compliance series, I break down the three most common “policies” I see in the market, and what tends to go wrong with each: - Blind rejection (“zero crypto”) - Blind acceptance (too much trust in KYC alone) - Simple rulebooks (thresholds and shortcuts that don’t cover real life). If you’ve ever seen a legitimate client get stuck in limbo, this will sound familiar. It’s a ~4-minute watch, and it’s the last “setup” clip before we get practical. What’s the biggest pain on your side: policy, data, or documentation?

Clip 5: Yes, we’re looking at legal slides. And yes, it matters. I have good news and bad news. 🥱 Bad news: it is the episode with legal text. 😊 Good news: it’s only a 3 slides - and it’s the “Why crypto EDD?” of the whole series. It explains what regulators actually expect when a crypto case lands on your desk: - Understand the client’s story - Pull the right transaction data - Build a story you can defend That’s it. It’s common sense, and it’s also what the rules are pointing you toward - even if they don’t always explain how to do it efficiently. One of the tricky things in compliance is that regulators are very good at describing what you must do…and much less specific about how to do it without drowning in manual work. This gap, the practical framework - that’s coming next.

In crypto EDD, most teams struggle because they lack a method. Clip 6 is about the first two steps of reviewing a crypto file: Step 1️⃣ : Capture the client’s story (properly). Not just “who is the person”, but what the client actually does in crypto and where their wealth is coming from. Step 2️⃣ : Pull the right transaction data. This is usually the hardest part. Crypto is almost never a single account and often 15–30 accounts and wallets across exchanges and chains.. with data in different formats. Without normalisation, you drown in spreadsheets. In this clip I explain why consistent data output is a boring superpower - and why it’s the foundation for everything that comes next. If you work in compliance, risk, or ops: what’s the biggest bottleneck on your side today - collecting data or making sense of it (coming in clip7)?

Clip 7 of the crypto EDD series is about the part where crypto cases usually go wrong: Step 3: Analysis - the most fun part, but also the hardest part, so we will dedicate the next 3 clips to this topic. Most teams fall into one of two traps: - Overworking the case (getting lost in thousands of trades) - Missing the point (letting forensic tools’ alerts drive the conclusion) The takeaway: don’t get stuck at the ‘everything level’ and move one level up to the client’s story. Verify it with transaction data, and keep your work clear and defensible. If you’ve ever reviewed a crypto case, what’s harder on your side - too much data or too little structure?

The Crypto Source of Wealth job can be reduced to one question: Does the client’s story look complete and consistent through the lens of transaction data? In this clip, I introduce the high-level SoW framework: • Money movements / Source of Funds layer • Investment activity layer  (plus an optional third check when it’s actually needed) If you review crypto cases, what’s harder for you today - getting the data, or turning it into a defensible story?

Blockchain analytics tools are a core part of crypto AML and compliance workflows, but treating them as definitive answers can create serious blind spots. In this video, Lukasz explains why BAT tools should be used as indicators rather than conclusions, and why Source of Wealth analysis and exchange data often play a larger role in crypto compliance investigations.

In a world where everyone is talking about automation in compliance: AI, better rules, better scoring, better alerts.. speed of processing KPIs rule the AML game. It is getting harder and harder to pause and see what is missing. But in the Source of Wealth work, the biggest speed-up and your best “tool” isn’t a tool. It’s the client. Clip 10 is about why crypto SoW isn’t always about automation, but often it’s a completeness problem, and the fastest way to close the case is by talking to your clients: - asking the right questions early - filling the missing wallets/exchanges - turning confusion into a defensible story.. or uncovering a LIE.