Business relationships outlive that day by years. A director resigns, an owner changes, a company goes insolvent, and the file that said "clear" on day one says nothing about day four hundred.
Not whether you monitor. It is whether ongoing due diligence catches what changed, and whether anyone saw it before the regulator asked about it.
Entities under watch individually or as a portfolio.
Register changes, sanctions, adverse media and PEP status tracked on the company and the people resolved as its owners together, so a change to a person surfaces on every company they control, not just the one you happened to be watching when it changed.
Alerts are triggered by a status change, not read off a fixed schedule, so a review happens when the risk actually moves rather than on a calendar that may lag it.
Runs on the same register network as company data and the same matching layer as screening.
A KYB file that was correct on day one and never checked again is the first thing an auditor asks about, and "we do not monitor" is not an answer that survives the question.
What triggers an alert, and at what threshold, set per entity risk class.
A file that was clean on day one and never checked again is the first thing an auditor asks about.
One alert queue across both, not two separate ones to reconcile.
Watches the company and the people behind it together. A change to either one is a change to the risk, and treating them as two separate watches is how the connection gets missed.