Tag Archives: Auditability

Blobs as First-Class Artefacts in Regulated Data Platforms

In regulated financial services, semi-structured payloads such as XML, JSON, PDFs, and messages are not “raw data” to be discarded after parsing: they are primary evidence. This article argues that blobs must be treated as first-class artefacts: preserved intact, timestamped, queryable, and reinterpretable over time. Relational models are interpretations that evolve; original payloads anchor truth. Platforms that discard or mutate artefacts optimise for neatness today at the cost of defensibility tomorrow.

Continue reading →

Why Transactions Are Events, Not Slowly Changing Dimensions

This article argues that modelling transactions as slowly changing dimensions is a fundamental category error in financial data platforms. Transactions are immutable events that occur once and do not change; what evolves is the organisation’s interpretation of them through enrichment, classification, and belief updates. Applying SCD2 logic to transactions conflates fact with interpretation, corrupts history, and undermines regulatory defensibility. By separating immutable event records from mutable interpretations, platforms become clearer, auditable, and capable of reconstructing past decisions without rewriting reality.

Continue reading →

Authority, Truth, and Belief in Financial Services Data Platforms

Financial services data architectures often fail by asking the wrong question: “Which system is the system of record?” This article argues that regulated firms operate with multiple systems of authority, while truth exists outside systems altogether. What data platforms actually manage is institutional belief: what the firm believed at a given time, based on available evidence. By separating authority, truth, and belief, firms can build architectures that preserve history, explain disagreement, and withstand regulatory scrutiny through accountable, reconstructable decision-making.

Continue reading →

Eventual Consistency in Regulated Financial Services Data Platforms

In regulated financial services, eventual consistency is often treated as a technical weakness to be minimised or hidden. This article argues the opposite: eventual consistency is the only honest and defensible consistency model in a multi-system, regulator-supervised institution. Regulators do not require instantaneous agreement: they require explainability, reconstructability, and reasonableness at the time decisions were made. By treating eventual consistency as an explicit architectural and regulatory contract, firms can bound inconsistency, preserve historical belief, and strengthen audit defensibility rather than undermine it.

Continue reading →

Why UK Financial Services Data Platforms Must Preserve Temporal Truth for Regulatory Compliance

A Regulatory Perspective (2025–2026). UK Financial Services regulation in 2025–2026 increasingly requires firms to demonstrate not just what is true today, but what was known at the time decisions were made. Across Consumer Duty, s166 reviews, AML/KYC, model risk, and operational resilience, regulators expect deterministic reconstruction of historical belief, supported by traceable evidence. This article explains where that requirement comes from, why traditional current-state platforms fail under scrutiny, and why preserving temporal truth inevitably drives architectures that capture change over time as a foundational control, not a technical preference.

Continue reading →

Common Anti-Patterns in Financial Services Data Platforms

Financial Services data platforms rarely fail because of tools, scale, or performance. They fail because architectural decisions are left implicit, applied inconsistently, or overridden under pressure. This article documents the most common and damaging failure modes observed in large-scale FS data platforms: not as edge cases, but as predictable outcomes of well-intentioned instincts applied at the wrong layer. Each pattern shows how trust erodes quietly over time, often remaining invisible until audit, remediation, or regulatory scrutiny exposes the underlying architectural fault lines.

Continue reading →

Operationalising Time, Consistency, and Freshness in a Financial Services Data Platform

This article translates the temporal doctrine established in Time, Consistency, and Freshness in a Financial Services Data Platform into enforceable architectural mechanisms. It focuses not on tools or technologies, but on the structural controls required to make time, consistency, and freshness unavoidable properties of a Financial Services (FS) data platform. The objective is simple: ensure that temporal correctness does not depend on developer discipline, operational goodwill, or institutional memory, but is instead enforced mechanically by the platform itself.

Continue reading →

From Graph Insight to Action: Decisions, Controls & Remediation in Financial Services Platforms

This article argues that financial services platforms fail not from lack of insight, but from weak architecture between detection and action. Graph analytics and models generate signals, not decisions. Collapsing the two undermines accountability, auditability, and regulatory defensibility. By separating signals, judgements, and decisions; treating decisions as time-qualified data; governing controls as executable policy; and enabling deterministic replay for remediation, platforms can move from reactive analytics to explainable, defensible action. In regulated environments, what matters is not what was known: but what was decided, when, and why.

Continue reading →

Migrating Legacy EDW Slowly-Changing Dimensions to Lakehouse Bronze

From 20-year-old warehouse SCDs to a modern temporal backbone you can trust. This article lays out a practical, regulator-aware playbook for migrating legacy EDW SCD dimensions to a modern SCD2 Bronze layer in a medallion/lakehouse architecture. It covers what you are really migrating (semantics, not just tables), how to treat the EDW as a source system, how to build canonical SCD2 Bronze, how to run both platforms in parallel, and how to prove to auditors and regulators that nothing has been lost or corrupted in the process.

Continue reading →

Enterprise Point-in-Time (PIT) Reconstruction: The Regulatory Playbook

This article sets out the definitive regulatory playbook for enterprise Point-in-Time (PIT) reconstruction in UK Financial Services. It explains why PIT is now a supervisory expectation: driven by PRA/FCA reviews, Consumer Duty, s166 investigations, AML/KYC forensics, and model risk, and makes a clear distinction between “state as known” and “state as now known”. Covering SCD2 foundations, entity resolution, precedence versioning, multi-domain alignment, temporal repair, and reproducible rebuild patterns, it shows how to construct a deterministic, explainable PIT engine that can withstand audit, replay history reliably, and defend regulatory outcomes with confidence.

Continue reading →

Building Regulator-Defensible Enterprise RAG Systems (FCA/PRA/SMCR)

This article defines what regulator-defensible enterprise Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) looks like in Financial Services (at least in 2025–2026). Rather than focusing on model quality, it frames RAG through the questions regulators actually ask: what information was used, can the answer be reproduced, who is accountable, and how risk is controlled. It sets out minimum standards for context provenance, audit-grade logging, temporal and precedence-aware retrieval, human-in-the-loop escalation, and replayability. The result is a clear distinction between RAG prototypes and enterprise systems that can survive PRA/FCA and SMCR scrutiny.

Continue reading →

Temporal RAG: Retrieving “State as Known on Date X” for LLMs in Financial Services

This article explains why standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) silently corrupts history in Financial Services by answering past questions with present-day truth. It introduces Temporal RAG: a regulator-defensible retrieval pattern that conditions every query on an explicit as_of timestamp and retrieves only from Point-in-Time (PIT) slices governed by SCD2 validity, precedence rules, and repair policies. Using concrete implementation patterns and audit reconstruction examples, it shows how to make LLM retrieval reproducible, evidential, and safe for complaints, remediation, AML, and conduct-risk use cases.

Continue reading →

AI Agents for Temporal Repair, Metadata Enrichment, and Regulatory Automation

This article explains where AI agents genuinely add value in regulated Financial Services data platforms — and where they become indefensible. It distinguishes “useful” agents from regulator-defensible ones, showing how agents can safely detect temporal defects, propose repairs, enrich metadata, and draft regulatory artefacts without bypassing governance. Using practical patterns and real failure modes, it defines a strict operating model — detect, propose, approve, apply — that preserves auditability, replayability, and SMCR accountability while delivering operational leverage that survives PRA/FCA scrutiny.

Continue reading →

Time, Consistency, and Freshness in a Financial Services Data Platform

This article explains why time, consistency, and freshness are first-class architectural concerns in modern Financial Services data platforms. It shows how truth in FS is inherently time-qualified, why event time must be distinguished from processing time, and why eventual consistency is a requirement rather than a compromise. By mapping these concepts directly to Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum layers, the article demonstrates how platforms preserve historical truth, deliver reliable current-state views, and enforce freshness as an explicit business contract rather than an accidental outcome.

Continue reading →

Golden-Source Resolution, Multi-Source Precedence, and Regulatory Point-in-Time Reporting on SCD2 Bronze

Why Deterministic Precedence Is the Line Between “Data Platform” and “Regulatory Liability”. Modern UK Financial Services organisations ingest customer, account, and product data from 5–20 different systems of record, each holding overlapping and often conflicting truth. Delivering a reliable “Customer 360” or “Account 360” requires deterministic, audit-defensible precedence rules, survivorship logic, temporal correction workflows, and regulatory point-in-time (PIT) reconstructions: all operating on an SCD2 Bronze layer. This article explains how mature banks resolve multi-source conflicts, maintain lineage, rebalance history when higher-precedence data arrives late, and produce FCA/PRA-ready temporal truth. It describes the real patterns used in Tier-1 institutions, and the architectural techniques required to make them deterministic, scalable, and regulator-defensible.

Continue reading →

Handling Embedded XML/JSON Blobs to Audit-Grade SCD2 Bronze

Financial Services platforms routinely ingest XML and JSON embedded in opaque fields, creating tension between audit fidelity and analytical usability. This article presents a regulator-defensible approach to handling such payloads in the Bronze layer: landing raw data immutably, extracting only high-value attributes, applying attribute-level SCD2, and managing schema drift without data loss. Using hybrid flattening, temporal compaction, and disciplined lineage, banks can transform messy blobs into audit-grade Bronze assets while preserving point-in-time reconstruction and regulatory confidence.

Continue reading →

Advanced SCD2 Optimisation Techniques for Mature Data Platforms

Advanced SCD2 optimisation techniques are essential for mature Financial Services data platforms, where historical accuracy, regulatory traceability, and scale demands exceed the limits of basic SCD2 patterns. Attribute-level SCD2 significantly reduces storage and computation by tracking changes per column rather than per row. Hybrid SCD2 pipelines, combining lightweight delta logs with periodic MERGEs into the main Bronze table, minimise write amplification and improve reliability. Hash-based and probabilistic change detection eliminate unnecessary updates and accelerate temporal comparison at scale. Together, these techniques enable high-performance, audit-grade SCD2 in platforms such as Databricks, Snowflake, BigQuery, Iceberg, and Hudi, supporting the long-term data lineage and reconstruction needs of regulated UK Financial Services institutions.

Continue reading →

Using SCD2 in the Bronze Layer with a Non-SCD2 Silver Layer: A Modern Data Architecture Pattern for UK Financial Services

UK Financial Services firms increasingly implement SCD2 history in the Bronze layer while providing simplified, non-SCD2 current-state views in the Silver layer. This pattern preserves full historical auditability for FCA/PRA compliance and regulatory forensics, while delivering cleaner, faster, easier-to-use datasets for analytics, BI, and data science. It separates “truth” from “insight,” improves governance, supports Data Mesh models, reduces duplicated logic, and enables deterministic rebuilds across the lakehouse. In regulated UK Financial Services today, it is the only pattern I have seen that satisfies the full, real-world constraint set with no material trade-offs.

Continue reading →