Validate the vendor
Resolve the supplied name, identifier and country to the contracting legal entity.
Confirmed supplier record
Know who stands behind a supplier before it enters your operating chain.
Verify the contracting entity, understand its ownership and group perimeter, and give procurement and risk teams one sourced record they can review together.
For procurement, third-party risk, compliance and vendor-master teams managing critical or high-value counterparties.
Supplier due-diligence fileEvidence assembled
SubjectNorthstar Logistics GmbH
ResolvedSupplier entity resolved
Decision questionAre we contracting with the right company, the right owners and the right group?
Government registry dataGerman registry identity and 100% corporate shareholder
Source factVerified public-source evidenceGroup website confirms operating role, labelled as public evidence
Separate evidenceZavia calculationGerman entity → Dutch parent → two 50% owners
Formula shownUnresolved or conflictingOne former subsidiary link has conflicting effective dates
ReviewWorkflow outcomeContracting entity supported; historical group conflict sent to review
One evidence model throughoutExact legal entityNamed source and dateVisible ownership pathExplicit evidence gaps
The operating problem
The vendor form rarely shows the full counterparty.
Trading names, local subsidiaries and layered ownership create avoidable review work. Zavia starts with the contracting legal entity and expands only through supported corporate relationships.
Decision to support
Are we contracting with the right company, the right owners and the right group?
01
Does the submitted supplier match an active registered legal entity?
02
Who owns or controls the supplier, and which group entities sit around it?
03
What changed after approval, and does the change require another review?
How the workflow fits
Move from submitted company to reviewable evidence.
Zavia provides the company and ownership layer. Your team keeps control of policy, judgment and the final decision.
Map ownership
Trace shareholders, UBO candidates, parents and subsidiaries relevant to the review.
Ownership and group perimeter
Document exceptions
Surface missing owners, recent changes, conflicting relationships and source limitations.
Risk-review reasons
Monitor material change
Watch supported ownership and group events after the supplier is approved.
Evidence-backed alerts
What your team receives
A decision file—not a data dump.
Every output is built to be reviewed by a person, passed into a system and revisited when the underlying company changes.
Supplier identity
Registered identity and status mapped to the name used in the procurement process.
Ownership perimeter
Direct shareholders, people reached, parents, subsidiaries and relevant jurisdictions.
Review notes
Specific reasons for approval evidence, analyst review or missing information—without a black-box score.
Portfolio monitoring
Dated ownership and group changes across suppliers selected for ongoing oversight.
Evidence architecture
Do not flatten four different evidence states into one answer.
The distinction is visible to analysts and available to systems through structured delivery.
Government registry data
The company fact or relationship as reported by the named official registry or government source.
Verified public-source evidence
A named public disclosure matched to the legal entity and kept separate from official registry facts.
Zavia calculation
A result derived from supported source facts, with the entity path and formula available to reproduce.
Unresolved or conflicting
A missing, unclear or inconsistent part of the record that the workflow must not convert into certainty.
The procurement test
What a skeptical buyer will challenge.
These are the controls that prevent a useful company-data workflow from becoming an overclaimed black box.
“More data will slow down supplier activation.”
Straightforward cases return a compact evidence file. Exceptions are separated so analysts focus on the small number that need judgment.
“A change alert does not prove supplier risk.”
Correct. An alert shows what changed and how the ownership conclusion moved; the buyer decides whether it affects the relationship.
“The local subsidiary may not represent the full group.”
Zavia preserves the selected entity while mapping supported parent and subsidiary links. It does not silently replace the contracting party with a group brand.
Use the same evidence everywhere
Web platform, API, MCP, bulk data and monitoring.
Agreed web, API, MCP, bulk-data and monitoring implementations are designed to preserve the same resolved entities, relationship paths, evidence types, available dates, calculations and unresolved states.
Compare access methodsStructured decision contextAre we contracting with the right company, the right owners and the right group?
- entity
- resolved
- registry_evidence
- attached
- ownership_paths
- visible
- calculations
- reproducible
- unresolved
- explicit
Frequently asked questions
Scope, evidence and workflow boundaries.
Need to test a specific jurisdiction or policy? Talk to the Zavia team.
Use your own company cases
Test the evidence before you change the workflow.
Start with a legal entity your team already knows. Compare the sources, ownership path and unresolved gaps against your current process.