Editorial methodology

1. What Finray Intelligence is

Finray Intelligence is the research arm of Finray Technologies Ltd. We publish vendor landscapes, buyer guides, and regulatory analyses for the people who actually procure, build, and operate regulated financial infrastructure — banks, payment institutions, electronic money institutions, MiCA-authorised CASPs, and the FinTech firms that work alongside them.

We are not analysts in the Gartner or Forrester sense. We are practitioners writing for practitioners. Our conflict structure is explicit (we ship our own products in some of the categories we analyse). Our methodology is named (we describe how we collect evidence and reach conclusions). Our updates are signal-driven (we refresh when material changes, not on quarterly calendars).

2. Editorial principles

• Vendor-neutral framing in categories where Finray does not operate. When we cover a category Finray does not ship a product in, we describe the buyer’s decision criteria first and the vendor landscape second.
• Explicit conflict disclosure in categories where Finray does operate. When we cover core banking, transaction risk monitoring, or governance / risk / compliance / internal control software, we disclose Finray’s direct stake in the category at the top of the piece and recuse Finray products from any “best of” or ranked comparison.
• Named methodology, not opinion. Each landscape declares the criteria used, the evidence sources consulted, and the limitations of the analysis. A reader should be able to reproduce our reasoning given the same inputs.
• Buyer-side framing. We optimise for the question a regulated firm’s CCO, CTO, or treasurer is actually trying to answer when they search for the topic — not for the vendor’s marketing pitch.
• No paid placements. No sponsorship. No “thought-leadership exchanges.” Vendors do not pay to appear, and we do not accept editorial briefs from vendors.

3. How research is conducted

• Public regulatory filings, vendor product documentation, audited disclosures, and primary source documents are the baseline evidence. Where those are insufficient, we conduct structured vendor outreach with the same questionnaire across the landscape.
• Each vendor named in a landscape is contacted and given the opportunity to correct factual errors before publication. Non-response does not exclude them.
• Where we make architectural or operational claims, we cite primary documentation. Where we make commercial claims (pricing, deployment time, customer counts), we cite the source of the claim and date it.
• Where evidence is missing or contested, we say so explicitly. We do not fill gaps with inference dressed as fact.

4. Conflict of interest disclosure

Finray Technologies Ltd ships three platforms in regulated finance infrastructure:

• Corebanq — core banking and payment infrastructure. Direct stakeholder in any piece covering core banking software, ledger systems, EMI safeguarding, payment institution platforms, or core banking selection.
• XZiel — transaction risk monitoring and investigation. Direct stakeholder in any piece covering KYT, sanctions screening, Travel Rule, MiCA CASP transaction monitoring, or unified crypto-fiat risk profiles.
• Ordinis — governance, risk, compliance, and internal control software. Direct stakeholder in any piece covering FINMA outsourcing oversight, DORA outsourcing register, internal control framework software, or operational-resilience tooling.

When Finray Intelligence publishes a piece in any of these categories:

1. The conflict is disclosed at the top of the piece, in plain language, before the body content begins.
2. Finray products are recused from “best of” rankings, vendor scorecards, and comparison tables.
3. The methodology section of each piece declares which vendors were considered, which were excluded, and why.
4. Where Finray products meet the buyer criteria, they are listed at the end of the piece, separately from the vendor-neutral analysis, in a clearly-labelled “Finray’s products in this space” section.

5. Update cadence

Pieces refresh when material changes — not on a fixed quarterly schedule.

• A piece is refreshed when: a regulator issues binding guidance that changes the analysis, a vendor’s offering changes materially (acquisition, deprecation, major version), or readers report factual errors that we verify.
• Each piece carries a “Last updated” date in its footer. Where the page has been updated since first publication, the footer also lists what changed and when.
• Where we defer an update because the change is not yet material, the relevant section carries a “Watching” note linking to the relevant regulatory consultation, vendor announcement, or industry signal.

6. Corrections, complaints, and contact

• Factual errors — write to [email protected] with the URL, the disputed claim, and the supporting evidence. We aim to acknowledge within 5 business days and resolve within 15.
• Vendors named in a landscape — to request correction of factual errors about your product or to update materials, write to [email protected]. We do not edit on commercial grounds, but we welcome factual corrections.
• Complaints regarding editorial bias or undisclosed conflicts — write to [email protected] and reference this page. Complaints of this nature are reviewed by Finray Technologies Ltd management at the company’s registered office, 115 Griva Digeni, Trident Centre, Limassol, Cyprus, HE 445903.
• Citation — Finray Intelligence pieces may be cited and linked by third parties under standard fair-use conventions. Republication in full requires prior written consent.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-01. Next review: when material editorial-policy changes are required, or annually.