Built to survive
being checked.

The expensive failure in this work is not a missed finding. It is a real finding attached to the wrong person or the wrong company. That looks exactly like diligence until someone checks it. Previo resolves the subject first, from a verified legal name where one is available, and anchors every subsequent search to it. Common names are where cheap screening quietly falls apart.

Each entry links to the record it came from and is dated by the underlying event, not by when an article about it appeared. That distinction decides whether a matter falls inside your relevance window or outside it. Every finding opens to the record it came from, so there is nothing to take on trust: open the source and check our reading of it. Incumbents cannot offer that.

Findings are grouped by event, so the same matter reported by five outlets counts once rather than five times. Weak matches to the subject are discounted. An uncorroborated open-forum lead is surfaced for a reviewer and cannot move the score on its own. The number means something because most of what it could have counted was thrown out.

A subject starts at 100 and every deduction is itemised against the finding that caused it, weighted by severity, recency and evidence strength. Thresholds move with the seniority of the role. No black box, and nothing you cannot walk a board through line by line.

Before release, an adjudication pass reviews the findings with power in one direction only: it can remove or downgrade, never add, raise, or release. Then a person reads the report and signs it. A person releases every report. It is a control on the automation, and a named accountability that gets weaker with scale rather than stronger, which is why we can offer it now.