DORA · NIS2 · Basel III OR · FAIR Methodology · European-built

Quantify Cyber & Operational Risk
in Capital Impact Terms.

Stop reporting risk. Start quantifying it. AIQ Suite translates ICT and operational risk into board-ready capital impact percentages — governed by a structured workflow built for DORA, NIS2, and Basel III environments.

Board-ready outputs
Capital impact %
DORA · NIS2 · Basel context
🛡️
CyberRisk AIQ
DORA · NIS2
⚖️
OpRisk AIQ
Basel III OR · AMA

Early access currently prioritised for banks, financial institutions, and regulated organisations.

Portfolio Risk — Capital & OR Capital Impact
Ransomware
1.84%
Data Exfiltration
1.12%
Phishing / BEC
0.68%
Settlement Error
1.41%
Payment Fraud
0.92%
System Outage
0.54%
Board-ready output: 3 scenarios exceed risk appetite — capital impact expressed on a single defensible basis across Cyber and OR.
🏦 Banks & Credit Institutions
🛡️ Insurance Companies
🏛️ Public Sector under NIS2
⚡ Critical Infrastructure Operators
🏢 Regulated Corporates
💳 Payment Institutions
Platform Modules

Two modules.
One integrated platform.

Each module can be deployed independently or together as AIQ Suite. Both share the same AI engine, governance workflow, reporting infrastructure, and organisational data.

Module 01

CyberRisk AIQ

ICT & Cyber Risk Quantification

Quantifies ICT and cyber risk through FAIR methodology applied to ICT assets and threat scenarios. Produces capital impact percentages aligned with DORA ICT risk assessment requirements and NIS2 obligations.

DORA NIS2 ISO 27002 NIST CSF CIS Controls
  • ICT Asset Registry with risk intelligence tagging
  • 354 controls — ISO 27002, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS v8 — import any framework via AI or CSV
  • Multiplicative control reduction model — realistic compounding, no inflation
  • DORA ICT Risk Report — structured per DORA Annex
  • NIS2 ICT Risk Report for public sector and corporate
  • Capital / Budget / Equity Impact calculation and reporting
  • Investment Optimizer — ROI-ranked controls per scenario
  • AI analyst assessment — jurisdiction-aware, editable, human-signed
  • BO Decision Guidance — ROI flags, governance checklist, Tier 1 DORA banner
Module 02

OpRisk AIQ

Operational Risk Quantification

Quantifies operational risk using FAIR methodology applied to business processes and Basel Event Type scenarios. Supports Advanced Measurement Approach (AMA) scenario analysis endorsed by ECB internal model guidance.

Basel III OR CRD IV AMA Solvency II
  • Business Process Registry with asset dependency mapping
  • Basel Event Type scenario categories (7 categories)
  • OR Capital Charge calculation per process
  • Operational Risk Manager / Risk Coordinator governance roles for OR workflow
  • Basel III AMA-aligned OR reporting
  • Process ↔ ICT Asset integration for cross-domain risk view
The Problem

Boards don't speak
heat maps.

Qualitative risk matrices leave organisations indefensible under regulatory scrutiny. Capital, compliance, and accountability demand a different language — for both Cyber and Operational Risk.

Before
"This is a High risk on our heat map."
Subjective. Indefensible. Means different things to different people. Fails DORA, Basel III, and NIS2 regulatory scrutiny.
After — AIQ Suite
"Our Cyber + OR capital exposure is 2.76% of Tier-1 capital."
Cyber Expected Loss: €3,200,000
OR Capital Charge: €4,100,000
Combined Capital Impact: 2.76%
Residual (w/ controls): €1,800,000
Defensible. Auditable. FAIR-based. Board-ready. Covers DORA, NIS2, and Basel III OR in one integrated view.
Core Capabilities

Three pillars.
Two modules. One governance platform.

01

Defensible Mathematics

FAIR methodology inputs processed through 10,000-run Monte Carlo simulation — for both ICT scenarios (CyberRisk AIQ) and Basel Event Type scenarios (OpRisk AIQ). Multiplicative control reduction model ensures realistic compounding. Outputs include Expected Loss, P50/P90/P95 confidence intervals, Loss Exceedance Curve, and capital impact percentage.

FAIR Monte Carlo Capital Impact OR Capital Charge Loss Exceedance Curve
02

Jurisdiction-Aware AI

Anthropic Claude AI delivers analysis calibrated to your sector, capital base, and jurisdiction. A bank in Montenegro receives CBCG-framed guidance. A bank in Croatia receives DORA and HNB context. A public body in Germany receives NIS2 and BSI framing. 44 European jurisdictions mapped — regulatory references serve as context and benchmark, never a compliance checklist.

44 Jurisdictions Anthropic Claude Regulatory Context Local Regulators
03

Integrated 3LoD Governance

End-to-end accountability from analyst assessment to board escalation. 1LoD: Analyst + ICT Custodian + Business Owner. 2LoD: CISO — methodological review and action plan oversight. Full audit trail, structured rework flow, BO Decision Guidance with ROI flags, Tier 1 DORA escalation banner. One workflow engine built around the governance model regulators expect.

3LoD Model Role Workflow Action Plans Audit Log
Workflow

From threat to
governed decision.

A structured governance workflow — shared across both modules — that converts qualitative threat intelligence into quantified, auditable risk decisions.

1
Both Modules

Analyst prepares quantitative assessment

For Cyber: selects ICT asset with risk intelligence tags, assigns threat scenario with editable description and threat actor, inputs FAIR parameters. For OR: selects business process with asset dependencies, assigns Basel Event Type scenario. AI suggests calibrated FAIR ranges for both.

Asset / Process Tagging AI FAIR Calibration Loss Modelling
10,000
Monte Carlo runs per assessment — Cyber and OR — producing P50/P90/P95 confidence intervals
2
CyberRisk AIQ

ICT Custodian / Risk Coordinator rates control effectiveness

For Cyber: ICT Custodian rates existing controls from ISO 27002, NIST CSF 2.0, and CIS Controls v8 on a 0–5 scale, with bulk multi-select and duplicate detection. For OR: Risk Coordinator rates process controls effectiveness. Platform calculates residual risk reduction.

ISO 27002:2022 NIST CSF 2.0 CIS Controls v8 Process Controls
354
Controls across ISO 27002, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS v8 — toggleable per organisation
3
Both Modules

CISO / Operational Risk Manager performs methodological review

For Cyber: CISO validates ICT risk methodology, reviews analyst's treatment recommendation and business risk narrative, and adds their own commentary. For OR: Operational Risk Manager performs the equivalent review. Both act as second-line quality gates before the business decision stage.

Quality Gate Analyst Review Return for Rework
Second Line
CISO / Operational Risk Manager act as methodological quality gates, not risk treatment decision-makers
4
Both Modules

Business Owner / Process Owner makes treatment decision

With AI analysis, analyst recommendation, and CISO/Operational Risk Manager commentary all visible, the risk owner accepts, mitigates, transfers, or avoids the risk. For OR: Process Owner holds formal accountability. Risks exceeding mandate trigger Board escalation.

Accept Mitigate Transfer Avoid Escalate
Risk Owner
Formal accountability for treatment decision — Cyber and OR — with complete audit trail
5
Both Modules

Structured action plan drives execution

Treatment decisions generate structured action plans. ICT Custodian adds controls from the framework library, AI suggestions, or custom entries — with improvement opportunities for existing under-performing controls. All tracked in a unified central view.

Technical Specification Cost Tracking Progress Monitoring
Full Trace
Every action linked to the risk that triggered it — from governance to execution, Cyber and OR
Governance Model

Six roles.
Clear accountability across both modules.

📊

Analyst

Cyber & OR — Both Modules

Prepares quantitative risk assessments end-to-end for both ICT and operational risk domains.

  • Asset & process selection
  • FAIR input modelling
  • Loss component analysis
  • AI analysis generation & editing
  • Action plan management
🔒

ICT Custodian / Risk Coordinator

ICT Custodian (Cyber) · Risk Coordinator (OR)

Provides technical input on control effectiveness and builds the action plan control set.

  • Control effectiveness rating
  • Bulk control selection
  • Action plan controls
  • Security posture validation
🎯

CISO / Operational Risk Manager

CISO (Cyber) · Operational Risk Manager (OR)

Second-line methodological review and quality gate — reviews analyst recommendation and narrative before BO decision.

  • Methodology validation
  • Analyst review commentary
  • Return for rework
  • Portfolio oversight
💼

Business Owner / Process Owner

ICT Asset Owner (Cyber) · Process Owner (OR)

Risk owner making the formal treatment decision with full AI and human context available.

  • Treatment decision
  • Escalation to Board
  • Risk acceptance accountability
🗂️

Asset Manager

CyberRisk AIQ

Maintains the ICT asset registry — creation, tagging, business owner assignment, decommissioning.

  • Asset CRUD
  • Tag management
  • Bulk CSV import
  • Decommission workflow
⚙️

Administrator

Both Modules

Platform configuration, module activation, and governance setup.

  • Module activation
  • User & role management
  • AI provider config
  • Risk thresholds & frameworks
AI Engine

Intelligence calibrated
to your jurisdiction, sector, and capital context.

Not generic advice. Every AI output is contextualised to your organisation's type, capital base, regulatory obligations, and jurisdiction — whether it's a DORA-scope bank in Croatia or a public authority in Montenegro.

🎯

FAIR Input Calibration — Cyber & OR

Suggests TEF and Vulnerability ranges calibrated to ICT asset criticality and threat actor profiles (Cyber), or to business process type and Basel Event Type category (OR). Confidence levels and value bands signal where human judgement is most needed.

🌍

Jurisdiction-Aware Regulatory Context

44 European jurisdictions mapped. AI analysis references the frameworks actually applicable to your organisation — CBCG for Montenegrin banks, DORA and HNB for Croatian institutions, NBS for Serbian entities. Regulatory references provide context and benchmark, never a compliance checklist.

Capital-Tier Treatment Recommendation

Deterministic treatment recommendation at temperature=0, anchored to your 4-tier capital impact framework. Tier thresholds configured per tenant. Tier 1 risks trigger Management Board escalation guidance aligned with DORA Article 5 requirements.

📋

Analyst Assessment — AI Draft, Human Signature

AI generates a structured analyst assessment using regulatory benchmarks and industry context — editable in a rich text editor. The analyst reviews, refines, and saves. What reaches the CISO and Board carries human accountability, not raw AI output.

🔧

Configurable AI Provider

Use Anthropic Claude (default), Azure OpenAI, or standard OpenAI. Provider configured per tenant in Admin Panel. Master AI switch enables full manual operation when AI is not required or available.

AI Context Inputs — Both Modules
Organisation Profile
Sector & Jurisdiction
Capital Base / Budget
Risk Appetite Tiers
Regulatory Frameworks
Asset / Process Context
Criticality & Classification
Asset Dependencies
Risk Type (Cyber / OR)
Regulatory Scope Tags
Anthropic Claude AI Engine
claude-sonnet · jurisdiction-aware · dual-module · governance-focused
Cyber Outputs
ICT FAIR calibration
Analyst Assessment draft
DORA/NIS2 context
OR Outputs
Basel Event analysis
Process control gaps
AMA documentation
Why AIQ Suite

What sets AIQ Suite apart.

Purpose-built for European regulated organisations — combining capabilities that are typically available only separately, at enterprise price points, or not at all.

Workflow + Quantification in One

Most quantification tools are calculators — they produce a number but leave coordination to email and spreadsheets. AIQ Suite embeds the complete governance workflow: analyst preparation, ICT/process control rating, CISO review, business owner decision, action plan, and approval — all in one platform, with full audit trail.

🔗

CR + OR on One Capital Basis

Cyber risk and operational risk are typically managed in separate silos. AIQ Suite quantifies both on the same capital basis — same assets, same users, same reporting infrastructure, same executive dashboard. A bank sees its ransomware risk and its settlement error risk side-by-side as capital impact percentages.

🗺️

Built for European Regulation

All major quantification platforms originate in North America. AIQ Suite is designed from the ground up for European regulatory requirements — DORA, NIS2, Basel III, EBA Guidelines, and 44 national jurisdictions including local regulators (CBCG, NBS, HNB, BaFin, FMA, FINMA). Not an afterthought — the architecture.

🔍

Full Calculation Transparency

Every input, every control rating, every Monte Carlo output is visible and auditable. FAIR inputs, loss components, control reduction calculations, capital impact formula — all accessible for regulatory review. No black box. Designed to withstand supervisory scrutiny under DORA Article 6 and EBA internal model requirements.

👤

Accessible Without Certification

FAIR methodology typically requires specialist training or external consultants. AIQ Suite makes FAIR accessible to any risk analyst through AI-assisted calibration, scenario context panels, industry benchmark guidance, and structured workflow. Expertise is embedded in the platform — not a prerequisite for using it.

📊

Industry Benchmarking

See how your organisation's capital impact compares to sector peers. Benchmark data sourced from Verizon DBIR, ENISA Threat Landscape, IBM X-Force, and Ponemon Institute — by organisation type, sector, and company size. Gives CISO and board concrete context: are we above or below industry average for this risk?

Compliance Coverage

Purpose-built for regulated sectors.

AIQ Suite structurally aligns internal risk governance with external auditing demands across major regulatory frameworks — through two purpose-built modules.

Framework
Applicable Sectors
Platform Coverage
Module
DORA
Digital Operational Resilience Act
BanksInsurersInvestment FirmsPayment Institutions
ICT risk quantification, capital impact, governance workflow, DORA ICT Risk Report per Annex requirements
CyberRisk AIQ
Basel III / CRR
Operational Risk — AMA
BanksCredit Institutions
FAIR-based AMA scenario analysis, OR capital charge quantification, Basel Event Type categorisation, ECB-aligned internal model documentation
OpRisk AIQ
NIS2
Network & Information Security Directive
Critical InfrastructureEnergyHealthPublic Sector
Risk identification and treatment workflow, control effectiveness evidence, NIS2 ICT Risk Report with Budget Impact terminology for public sector
CyberRisk AIQ
Solvency II
Insurance Prudential Regulation
Insurance Companies
Operational risk quantification (OR module), ICT risk for DORA-in-scope insurers (Cyber module), capital adequacy context
Both Modules
ISO 27001
Information Security Management
Any Organisation
ISO 27002:2022 controls library (aligned, not reproduced), ISMS-compatible risk assessment process
CyberRisk AIQ
Product Roadmap

A living platform,
continuously deepened.

Both CyberRisk AIQ and OpRisk AIQ are live. Intelligence, enterprise, and scale features are in active development.

CyberRisk AIQ
● Live
  • FAIR-based quantification engine (multiplicative control model)
  • 10,000-run Monte Carlo — P50/P90/P95 + capital impact
  • 9-role 3LoD governance workflow
  • 354 controls — ISO 27002, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS v8
  • Controls import — Framework AI, Document AI, CSV
  • Jurisdiction-aware AI — 44 European countries
  • Investment Optimizer — ROI per control
  • DORA + NIS2 regulatory reports
  • Asset Risk Map — portfolio heatmap
  • CISO Board Summary — AI-generated, editable
  • PDF export — assessment + board pack
  • BO Decision Guidance with ROI and governance flags
OpRisk AIQ
● Live
  • Business Process Registry with asset dependencies
  • Basel Event Type scenarios (7 categories)
  • OR Capital Charge quantification
  • Operational Risk Manager / Risk Coordinator roles
  • Basel III AMA reporting
  • OR Risk Register + ORM summaries
  • Integrated Cyber + OR Executive Dashboard
  • Org-type capital labels — Tier 1 / Budget / Equity
Intelligence & Enterprise
◑ In Development
  • Multi-language UI — AI-assisted translation
  • Tenant branding + configurable role labels
  • Org Units — hierarchical organisation structure
  • Industry Peer Benchmarking — DBIR, ENISA, Ponemon
  • Custom Report Builder — CR & OR, role-based visibility, AI summary
  • Designated Representative — delegate BO/Process Owner tasks
  • TOTP two-factor authentication (Google/Microsoft Authenticator)
  • Loss Exceedance Curve — full distribution visualisation
  • Industry Scenario Library with benchmark FAIR inputs
  • Risk Register Migration Assistant — import from Excel/PDF
  • Multi-tenant architecture + offline licence management
  • Holding + subsidiaries multi-group architecture
See It In Action

From threat to capital impact
in one defensible view.

A simplified scenario — Core Banking System under ransomware threat — quantified through FAIR methodology and 10,000 Monte Carlo runs.

Asset
Core Banking System
Criticality: Critical · DORA scope
Scenario
Ransomware Attack
TEF: 0.8/yr · Vulnerability: 45%
1.84%
Capital Impact
€4.6M
Expected Loss
€9.2M
P90 Loss
Tier 1
Risk Tier
Active Controls
Firewall · 4/5 Backup & Recovery · 3/5 Incident Response · 2/5

See how MFA + EDR reduce capital impact

This is a simplified scenario. See your organisation's real risk profile with actual assets and controls.

Request Early Access

See your organisation's risk
expressed as capital impact %.

Request early access and we'll show you how AIQ Suite quantifies your Cyber and Operational Risk in terms your board and regulators can act on.

Early access only
EU data centres On-prem option Configurable AI provider DORA + NIS2 + Basel III aligned
Priority access for banks, financial institutions, insurers, critical infrastructure and public sector organisations.