AI Readiness · Financial services
Financial services AI readiness assessment — SR 11-7, NYDFS, EU AI Act aware
Where does your bank, insurer, asset manager, or fintech stand on AI readiness? Our financial-services bank aligns with SR 11-7 model risk management, NYDFS 500, SOX data governance, and ECOA-adjacent fairness practice.
What we reference
SR 11-7 / Model Risk Management
Governance questions mirror independent validation, inventory, and performance monitoring expectations.
NYDFS 500 + OCC guidance
Vendor, incident response, and access-control questions reference this guidance where applicable.
SOX / PCI
Data-quality and lineage questions lean into SOX-grade controls, and PCI shows up in classification policy.
EU AI Act
Fairness, transparency, and human oversight items reference the relevant AI Act articles.
Sample financial services questions
- 1. Do you maintain a live model inventory with SR 11-7 classification and a designated model risk owner?
- 2. Do you perform independent model validation (second-line) before production rollout?
- 3. Do you run bias and fairness audits on models that influence credit, insurance, or treatment of customers?
How does this compare to SR 11-7?
The governance pillar explicitly references inventory, validation, and monitoring practices. It is not a substitute for SR 11-7 validation, but it highlights gaps against the spirit of the guidance.
Do you cover fair lending / ECOA?
Yes — the data pillar includes an explicit bias and fairness question, and recommendations reference ECOA 1002 where relevant.
What benchmark does a mid-size firm see?
Financial services benchmarks cover all five pillars at 51-200, 201-1000, and 1001-5000 employee sizes, subject to the 30-sample minimum per segment.