ChainScreen publishes practical guides for small EU crypto firms on sanctions screening obligations, MiCA readiness, audit evidence, vendor selection, and GDPR/data-residency issues.
The screening itself is the easy part. The hard part is proving what was checked, when it was checked, and against which list version. The guides focus on that evidence layer first.
Search one list at a time, copy screenshots, update spreadsheets, and hope someone can reconstruct the decision later. That works until a regulator, auditor, or bank asks for evidence.
Run the screening, retain the record, and keep something your team can actually use in review, audit prep, or partner due diligence. The useful outcome is a process your team can explain and defend.
"We only need sanctions screening evidence. Why are we shopping an entire analytics platform?"
Start with the screening record, report, and workflow your small team actually needs"The free tools can check the address, but they don't prove what happened later."
Traceable records, list-version evidence, and audit-ready outputs built into the workflow"Our compliance officer still patches together manual checks, screenshots, and notes."
Use a simple documented workflow now and add automation only where it actually reduces effort"When someone asks for last quarter's screening evidence, it becomes a reconstruction exercise."
Keep timestamps, list versions, screening IDs, and regulator-facing evidence in one place| Chainalysis Free | Enterprise | Documented process | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OFAC SDN | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| EU Consolidated | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| UN Sanctions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Audit trail | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reusable screening records | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ |
| EU data residency | ✗ | Varies | ✓ |
| Best fit | Quick ad hoc checks | Large compliance teams | Small EU crypto firms that need proof, not platform sprawl |
Fact-based analysis of EU sanctions screening requirements. Every claim sourced to EU regulations, EBA guidelines, or NCA publications.
Because many small firms do not need a full analytics platform. They need screening evidence, traceability, and a workflow they can actually operate.
ChainScreen is now an editorial research site. The former API, hosted checker, account system, lead forms, Terms of Service, and Data Processing Agreement were retired on 2026-05-12.
Core articles are reviewed against official sources such as EU regulations, EBA guidance, ESMA publications, CySEC notices, OFAC, and FinCEN materials.
Start with the editorial guides and evidence checklists. For implementation work, contact us directly with your regulator, service type, and evidence requirements.
That is exactly why the primary offer is workflow and reporting first. research support is available when it meaningfully reduces manual work.
DailyMind LTD (HE 439959), a registered Cyprus company. We're compliance engineers building tools for our own regulatory environment.
Compliance Officers — stop rebuilding screening evidence from screenshots and spreadsheets. Keep a process you can actually defend in review.
Operations Directors — give your team a repeatable workflow instead of another compliance tool nobody fully adopts.
Founders and Technical Leads — start with the evidence and process layer first, then add workflow design where it saves time.
Tell us how you screen today, where the process breaks, and what kind of review or audit pressure you are under. We can point you to the right guide or checklist.
Start the conversation →Telegram group · Follow on X · LinkedIn — compliance research updates