Know who you buy from, before they become the problem.
SEVAL is being built to qualify, evaluate, score and continuously monitor suppliers — financial health, compliance, risk, ESG, cybersecurity, quality and performance in one supplier record. It is not available yet. What follows is what it will do, and founding partners are shaping what ships first.
SCREDIT demo environment · illustrative data, not a customer
Supplier management shouldn't stop at onboarding.
Most suppliers are assessed once, using whatever they volunteer, and never examined again. Information ends up spread across spreadsheets, inboxes, shared drives and ERP records, so certifications expire unnoticed, financial deterioration surfaces when delivery stops, and nobody can reconstruct why a vendor was approved. The discipline that answers this already exists — read the financials, weigh them against a policy, band the risk, watch the account between reviews. Credit teams have practised it for decades. Almost nobody applies it to the vendor side.
Everything below except the foundation section is planned capability, not shipped capability. SEVAL cannot be bought today. We publish the roadmap because early conversations change it — and because a page that quietly implies more than exists is worse than one that says where things stand.
Built for procurement. Useful across the enterprise.
Where supplier failure actually hurts
- Manufacturing with single-sourced or tooled parts
- Construction supply with subcontractor, bonding and safety exposure
- Distribution carrying deposits and long-lead inventory
- Regulated sectors where evidence has to be produced on demand
- Any team already running credit analysis on customers
You already have the skill in-house
Reading a set of accounts for solvency is the same discipline in both directions; only the emphasis changes. If your credit team spreads statements for customers, they can assess your critical suppliers — SEVAL is being built so they do not need a second system to do it.
One record, several audiences
Procurement qualifies, finance reads exposure, risk watches concentration, compliance holds the evidence, security assesses third-party access, quality runs corrective actions. The plan is one supplier record those teams share rather than six views nobody reconciles.
What SEVAL is being built to solve
Assessed once, never again
a supplier checked at onboarding and never re-examined, so deterioration is discovered when the delivery does not arrive.
What SCREDIT doesPlanned — standing evaluation with cadence by tier, and re-checks triggered by events rather than the calendar.
Spend mistaken for exposure
risk ranked by annual spend, when what actually hurts is replacement time on a sole-source part or a supplier holding your tooling.
What SCREDIT doesPlanned — tiering on replacement impact and financial strength, so attention lands where a failure would cost most.
No reconstructable record
a spreadsheet holds one analyst's judgement at one moment and cannot say why a vendor was approved, under which policy, by whom.
What SCREDIT doesPlanned — the same decision record SCREDIT keeps for credit approvals, applied to supplier decisions.
Built to connect, not to replace
SEVAL is planned to sit alongside the systems already running procurement and finance rather than becoming another island of supplier data. The connector layer below is the one SCREDIT uses today; extending it to supplier evaluation is part of the SEVAL build, not something available now.
ERP and finance
Keep the ERP as the system of record for the vendor master and payables; SEVAL is planned to add the evaluation layer beside it.
- Vendor master alignment
- Category and spend context
Business and credit intelligence
Registry, credit and trade-payment data on the companies you buy from, drawn through the same bureau layer SCREDIT already runs.
- Company verification
- Trade payment behaviour
Identity and access
Enterprise sign-on and role mapping, so supplier data inherits the access model your organisation already governs.
- Role-based access
- Tenant isolation
Documents and signature
Collection, signature and storage of the evidence a supplier has to provide, with expiry carried on the record.
- Evidence capture
- Expiry tracking
The foundation — shipped today in SCREDIT
Not a plan. Each item is live and demonstrable now against the customers you extend credit to. It is what makes the rest of this page a roadmap rather than a wish, and why SEVAL is an extension of an engine that exists rather than a new product from nothing.
Financial statement analysis
Structured capture with consistent ratio, trend and derived-metric computation.
Commercial bureau data
Experian, Equifax, TransUnion, D&B, Creditsafe, Ansonia, Anscers and ProfileCredit, pulled into the decision.
Weighted scorecards and risk bands
Your components, your weights, your thresholds — with the decision recorded.
Documents, signature and expiry
One envelope for what a counterparty must provide, evidenced and tracked to expiry.
Planned — the supplier record, and getting it filled in
One profile per supplier, built from what they submit, what your teams know, and what public sources say. Onboarding that asks each supplier only for what their category, country and risk actually require.
Supplier 360 profile
Will hold corporate identity, ownership, sites, categories, contacts, tax and banking, certifications, contracts and document expiry as one versioned record.
Conditional onboarding journeys
Will vary the forms, documents and questionnaires by supplier type, category, geography, spend and risk — so a stationery vendor is not asked a manufacturer's questions.
Supplier self-service
Will let suppliers maintain their own details, certificates and evidence rather than emailing them to a buyer who re-keys them.
Country-aware requirements
Will follow each jurisdiction's own registration, tax, banking and document expectations rather than a single US-shaped default.
Planned — evaluation, scoring and approval
Different suppliers carry different risk. A logistics provider should not be evaluated like a software vendor or a construction subcontractor. The evaluation model varies; the discipline does not.
Configurable evaluation frameworks
Will assemble criteria by category, industry, country, business unit, spend and strategic importance.
Explainable scorecards
Will give the score and the reasons behind it — weights, thresholds, mandatory criteria and any override, recorded.
Financial health assessment
Will spread a vendor's statements for liquidity, leverage, profitability and cash generation, and size the order against their balance sheet.
Approval workflow
Will route sequential, parallel and conditional approvals across finance, legal, compliance, security and quality, with SLAs, delegation and escalation.
Supplier comparison
Will compare candidates on more than price — financial health, risk, compliance, capacity, geography and strategic fit.
Planned — risk, compliance, ESG and cyber
Supplier risk is never one-dimensional. These bands consolidate into a single risk view rather than living in four disconnected tools. Data sources and jurisdictional coverage are undecided and we will not guess at them here — see the FAQ.
Consolidated risk profile
Will bring financial, operational, continuity, country, concentration, legal and delivery risk into one picture.
Concentration and single-source risk
Will flag where replacement time rather than spend is what a failure would cost, including your share of their revenue.
Compliance and evidence tracking
Will centralise registrations, licences, insurance, ISO and safety certificates, and notify before they expire rather than after.
ESG and responsible sourcing
Will assess environmental, labour and governance criteria proportionate to the supplier, not one questionnaire for everyone.
Third-party cybersecurity
Will evaluate technology suppliers against your requirements, with evidence mapped to the frameworks you already ask about.
Screening
Will cover sanctions, PEP and adverse-media checks, with the jurisdictions stated rather than implied.
Planned — monitoring, performance and assistance
Approval is a beginning, not an endpoint. A supplier who was low-risk last year may not be now, and the point of a standing record is that something happens when that changes.
Continuous monitoring
Will watch public filings, registered charges, judgments and submitted evidence between scheduled reviews.
Change triggers action
Will open alerts, reassessments, corrective actions, requalification or suspension when something material moves — not just change a colour on a dashboard.
Performance and corrective action
Will track on-time delivery, quality, defects, lead time and SLA, and carry CAPA from root cause through verification to closure.
Portfolio view
Will show supplier exposure across the book — high-risk counts, expiring documents, geographic and category concentration, requalification pipeline.
Assistive, explainable AI
Will help read documents, extract expiry dates, summarise a financial position and explain why a supplier scores as it does — with every finding traceable to its evidence and a human making the decision.
Point-in-time review versus continuous assurance
Measured against the two ways credit actually runs today — not against a straw man.
| Criterion | Continuous assuranceRecommended | Spreadsheet + questionnaire | Periodic audit |
|---|---|---|---|
| When risk is assessed | On a cadence set by tier, plus on events | At onboarding, then rarely | At each engagement |
| What a threshold crossing does | Opens an alert, review or corrective action with an owner | Nothing, unless someone re-checks | Appears in the next report |
| Reconstructing a decision | Recorded — policy, inputs, approver, overrides | One analyst's judgement, unversioned | Delivered as a document |
| Evidence and expiry | Tracked centrally with notice before lapse | Chased by memory and inbox search | Sampled at audit time |
| Effort per supplier | Proportionate to category and risk | Same questionnaire for everyone | Per engagement |
The lifecycle SEVAL is being built around
Qualify
Invite, register and verify — with the requirements varying by category, country and risk rather than one form for everyone.
Evaluate
Assess financial health, compliance, capability and risk against a framework you configure, and score it explainably.
Approve
Route the decision through the teams your governance model requires, and keep a record that can be reconstructed later.
Monitor
Watch for change between reviews, and make crossing a threshold cause something — a review, an action, a requalification.