Resolve
Match the submitted legal name or identifier to the correct company and jurisdiction.
Verified entity candidate
Resolve the company. Trace its owners. Keep onboarding moving.
Give onboarding teams one evidence file for the legal entity, direct shareholders, ultimate owners and unresolved gaps—without turning every corporate customer into a manual research case.
For KYB operations, compliance teams and product owners onboarding legal entities across multiple jurisdictions.
Onboarding evidence fileEvidence assembled
SubjectNorthstar Trading Ltd
ResolvedEntity resolved · Active
Decision questionCan we onboard this exact legal entity—and defend the evidence used?
Government registry dataCompanies House identity and direct shareholder filing
Source factVerified public-source evidenceNo additional public evidence required for the supported equity chain
Separate evidenceZavia calculation70% × 50% = 35% effective interest for each indirect owner
Formula shownUnresolved or conflictingCurrent voting agreements were not available
ReviewWorkflow outcomeRoute equity finding as supported; send control conclusion to review
One evidence model throughoutExact legal entityNamed source and dateVisible ownership pathExplicit evidence gaps
The operating problem
A registry match is the start of KYB, not the finish.
The company name must resolve to the right legal entity before ownership can be assessed. Zavia keeps the identity record, shareholder chain, calculations and evidence gaps in one reviewable case.
Decision to support
Can we onboard this exact legal entity—and defend the evidence used?
01
Is this the correct, active legal entity in the stated jurisdiction?
02
Who owns it directly, and which corporate shareholders require another layer?
03
Which people are reached, which threshold is met, and what remains unresolved?
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.
Retrieve
Bring company identity and available ownership records into a common evidence model.
Registry evidence pack
Trace
Continue through corporate shareholders until people are reached or a branch becomes unresolved.
Ownership paths and UBO candidates
Route
Return supported findings, calculations and exceptions to the buyer's approval or review policy.
Decision-ready case file
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.
Legal-entity record
Legal name, registration number, status, address, incorporation details and named registry source.
Ownership chain
Direct shareholders, intermediate companies, people reached and path-by-path effective interests.
Review explanation
Plain-language reasons showing what is supported, calculated, conflicting or unavailable.
Refresh and monitoring
A reusable company record that can be refreshed or monitored after onboarding.
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.
“Global coverage always hides local gaps.”
Coverage and source availability are disclosed at the jurisdiction and field level. Missing ownership does not become a guessed UBO.
“An automated match could approve the wrong company.”
Candidate legal entities remain visible with identifiers, status, address and jurisdiction before the ownership report is opened.
“We cannot outsource the approval decision.”
Zavia provides evidence and reason states. Your policy owns thresholds, risk appetite and the final onboarding decision.
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 contextCan we onboard this exact legal entity—and defend the evidence used?
- 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.