Governance, risk and compliance · one platform

Nine systems, five consultants,
and the answer still lives in a spreadsheet.

Amzaa runs audit, risk, policy, controls, vendor risk, issues, evidence and regulatory submissions on one engine, with one graph underneath. Your next solution is a configuration, not a release. And when the board asks whether the AI can be switched off, you can show them.

Become a design partner See what it runs
What it costs to govern
Millions a year Hundreds a month

The cost of an enterprise governance platform is not the licence. It is the implementation, the certified consultants, the change requests, and the nine systems you kept because none of them could talk to each other.

Amzaa removes the middle. There is no implementation partner because there is nothing to implement in code.

The question you came here with

Six people open this page. They are not asking the same thing.

Chief executive · CFO
"Why am I paying for nine systems?"
Because each one arrived to solve one problem and brought its own database. Amzaa runs all of them on one engine, one graph, one audit chain. Consolidation is the default state, not a migration project.
Administrator
"Do I have to raise a ticket for a new field?"
No. Press create, run the wizard, and it is live on save. New app, new field, new workflow stage, new calculation. You do it yourself, and it takes minutes.
IT · Platform team
"Will the governance backlog land on my desk?"
It will not. A new solution in Amzaa is a set of rows on a shared engine, not a codebase to maintain. Zero code. Nothing to deploy, nothing to regression-test.
Risk team
"Does my register know what it touches?"
Every record carries its own risk, and the graph knows which controls, entities and obligations sit behind it. A risk is not a row in a spreadsheet. It is a node with edges.
Internal audit
"Can I run an engagement end to end in one place?"
Planning, fieldwork, tests, samples, exceptions, issues, reporting. One record, one chain, and last year's issue carried forward so a repeat finding is visible as a repeat.
Compliance
"Which control discharges this obligation?"
Regulation to citation to control to policy to evidence. The whole chain is traversable, and when a link breaks the platform tells you. Nobody has to remember why a policy exists.
What it runs today

Every one of these is the same engine, configured differently.

01
Audit
Engagements from planning to reporting, with tests, samples and exceptions on the same record.
02
Risk
Registers that inherit from the graph, so a risk knows the controls and entities it touches.
03
Policy
Policies traced back to the regulation and citation that require them, not to a folder.
04
Controls
A common control framework, mapped once, reused across every framework you report against.
05
Compliance
Obligations by jurisdiction and sector, tied to the controls that discharge them.
06
Vendor risk
Third-party reviews with tiering, cadence and owner, on the same audit-grade record.
07
Issues
Findings, remediation and carry-forward, so a repeat issue is visible as a repeat.
08
Evidence
Proof attached to the control it proves, with the day it goes stale flagged for you.
09
Regulatory submissions
Filings and deadlines, each carrying the regulator page and line the date came from.

There is no separate product to buy for each of these, and no separate database underneath them. The tenth one is a configuration, and it does not need a developer. See each solution →

A floor that can be switched off
is not a floor.
AI, governed

The board will ask if you can switch it off.

Usually that question is answered in a slide. Here it is answered on the screen: one action, every AI call stops, and nothing is left behind. Count the calls before, count them after.

Underneath sits a deterministic layer that never used a model, so it keeps running with the AI dead. Coverage gaps, orphaned citations, broken lineage, evidence gone stale. Same inputs, same findings, every run.

Pull the switch yourself
Runs with the AI off
Coveragecontrols with nothing behind them
Orphanscitations mapped to nothing
Lineageregulation to evidence, severed
Stalenessthe day a source stops proving it

No model, no prompt, no inference. It has no off switch, and every tenant gets it, including the ones who buy no AI.

Forensic by construction

Every record can tell you who touched it, and what it looked like before.

Whoa person, resolved to a name. Not an ID nobody recognises.
Whenstamped by the engine, not by the caller.
Whatthe field, the value before, the value after.
Whythe workflow stage, the rule, or the approval that caused it.
AI or humanif an agent proposed it, that is on the record, with who approved it.
Sealedan immutable chain. Break a link and the platform knows.

This is not an audit log you switch on. It is how writes happen. How the engine works →

Where it goes

Governance was the hard part. It was never the whole map.

Audit, risk and compliance is the most unforgiving test a configurable platform can face. Everything must be attributable, every change reversible, every AI action defensible to a regulator. Pass that, and the rest of the enterprise is the same engine with different rows.

Service management. Asset and configuration management. The same graph, the same wizard, the same audit chain.

Read the direction
RunningAudit · Risk · Policy · Controls · Compliance · Vendor risk · Issues · Evidence · Submissions
NextService management. Tickets are records. Workflows are stages. Both already exist.
ThenConfiguration management. Assets and relationships are what the graph already is.
AfterWhatever you configure. That is the point of an engine.
Design partner programme

Bring us the question your regulator is going to ask.

A small cohort of regulated enterprises and private equity firms. Early access, real influence on what gets built, and pricing that holds.

We are pre-launch and we will not dress it up. There are no logos on this page because there are none to show. Come and try to break it.