Prove it on your own deals before you adopt anything.
Every Luminnovate product starts as a pilot on your own files, with agreed success criteria, measured against what you do today. The winner is named even when it is not us.
- Your files
- Your review capacity
- Agreed success criteria
- A report you keep
- No live changes
How every pilot runs
- Your filesHistorical deals or files you have already decided. If you prefer, de-identified: you hash names and account numbers before any file moves and the economic content stays intact.
- Your review capacityThe comparison is made at the reviews, approvals or calls your team already makes, so the result is one you could act on.
- Agreed success criteriaWhat good looks like is written down before the pilot starts, with a named sign-off owner on both sides.
- The coverage tableCases found by both, by your current process only, by ours only, and missed by both. Where decisions would differ, and why.
- A report you keepWhat it adds, where it differs, what the difference is worth under your own assumptions, whichever way the result goes.
- No live changesNothing in production moves during the pilot. Then the hosted service, or your own environment for institutions, with terms agreed after.
What each pilot measures
| Product | Measured against | What the report shows |
|---|---|---|
| Underwriting memo | Your own underwriters | Agreement with your decisions, where they differ and why, time per file against your process |
| Bank statement analysis | Your own analysts' labels | Reconciliation rate, needs-review rate, agreement with your labels |
| KYB business verification | The checks you run today | Agreement with your checks, false positives at the same catch rate |
| Cashflow score | Your incumbent scorecard | Ranking, approval rate at equal loss, loss at equal approval, calibration, segments, a priced scenario |
| Renewals | Renewals you have already decided | The forecast from the full history beside the forecast from the latest statements alone |
| Early warning | The rule you run today | What it would have caught a month ahead at your false-alert budget |
| Hardship and collections | The actions you took | Which actions cause payment, for which customers |
| Pricing and offers | The prices you set | Where prices and offers would differ, and what the difference is worth |
| Portfolio | Your own book | Last quarter's movement split into risk, mix and conditions |
| Fraud and scams | Your current controls at your review capacity | Additional cases, overlap, missed labelled cases, false alerts, reviewer effort |
What you can buy
Start an evaluation: vendor and model evaluation
Who it is for
Fraud or credit leaders with a vendor decision pending, and model risk and validation leaders who must say what a change adds before it is adopted.
What you get
- What a vendor model, data feed or AI configuration adds to your baseline, measured at fixed review capacity
- The coverage table: both, current only, challenger only, missed by both
- Reviewer effort, false alerts and the cases each misses
- A report your committee can read, whichever way the result goes, with the answer "keep what you have" when that is the answer
Why it holds up
It scores and it measures. Any vendor's model runs beside your baseline at the same review capacity, with planted known cases where labels are thin, and you keep the evidence either way.
How it arrives
On your approved historical extracts, in your environment or as a hosted run, with no live changes.
The first step
A fixed-fee evaluation on your own history, with success criteria agreed first. The winner is named even when it is not us.
What you keep
- The reportThe result, the coverage table and the difference valued under your assumptions.
- The evidence packEvery figure traced to the run that produced it, replayable.
- The success criteria recordWhat was agreed, who signed it off, and what the result was against it.
Bring us the decision you are least sure of.
Start a pilot