Trade Finance Automation Hub for Global Bank GCC
Sapnity implemented a Trade Finance Automation Hub on Power Platform that sits above multiple trade finance and core banking systems — digitising LC/BG issuance, document scrutiny, AML checks and approvals for a 500+ FTE GCC serving corporate and FI clients across Asia, Europe and the Middle East.
1. Business Problem — Paper-Heavy Trade Ops at Scale
The bank ran a large trade operations hub handling letters of credit (LCs), bank guarantees (BGs), collections and other trade instruments for corporate and FI clients. Trade cores had evolved over time, but the operating model was still anchored on paper, email and manual checklists.
- LC applications and documents arrived via branches, scans, SWIFT and email attachments.
- Document checking relied on individual experience and Excel-based discrepancy logs.
- Sanctions and AML checks happened in separate systems with limited orchestration.
- Maker-checker workflows spanned multiple tools with limited end-to-end visibility.
- Trade leadership lacked a consolidated view of TAT, rework and compliance exceptions.
The GCC delivered high effort — but the control layer lived in people’s heads and spreadsheets, not in a reusable, governed system.
2. Sapnity’s Mandate
Group Operations and Trade leadership asked Sapnity to:
- Design a Trade Finance Automation Hub that standardises LC/BG workflows without replacing existing trade cores.
- Digitise document intake, checking and discrepancy management in a single workspace.
- Integrate AML/sanctions checks and exceptions into the trade workflow, not as a side-system.
- Provide real-time visibility into trade volumes, TAT, rework and compliance breaches.
- Create a reusable pattern for new trade products and corridors without fresh IT projects.
3. Before — Fragmented LC/BG Processing & Compliance Risk
A single LC issuance could traverse branch, relationship manager, trade ops, compliance and payment teams — leaving a trail of PDFs, scans and emails. Turnaround time depended heavily on which checker picked up the file and how quickly they could reconcile documents.
- Multiple “shadow” trackers maintained by different teams to monitor LC/BG status.
- Document scrutiny quality varied by checker and shift — creating operational risk.
- Sanctions hits and AML alerts were not always linked back to the trade workflow.
- Reporting for internal audit and regulators required painstaking manual collation.
The bank had strong policies and systems, but the glue between them was fragile and manual — exactly where regulators and clients expected consistency.
4. After — Sapnity Trade Finance Automation Hub
Sapnity implemented a Trade Finance Automation Hub on Power Platform: a unified workspace for LC/BG operations that digitises intake, orchestrates document checking, integrates AML/sanctions results and connects to trade cores and core banking.
Corporate & FI Customers
Clients, branches and RMs submitting LC/BG requests and trade instructions.
Trade Intake & Case Creation
Power Apps front-door consolidating branch, SWIFT and portal requests into a single trade case record.
Document AI & Validation
AI-assisted extraction and rule-based checks for required documents, amounts, dates, UCP / ISP compliance fields.
Compliance & Risk Checks
Integrated AML, sanctions and dual-use checks with clear hit workflows and escalation rules.
Trade Ops Workflow (Maker-Checker)
Queue-based assignment, maker-checker controls, discrepancy management and structured client communication.
Trade Core & Core Banking
Posting to trade finance cores and core banking; payment instructions and collateral/limit utilisation updates.
Trade Control Tower & MI
TAT, volume, discrepancy and compliance dashboards by corridor, client, product and processing centre.
The hub became the single source of truth for trade operations, reducing dependency on local trackers and significantly improving control and transparency.
5. Implementation Story
Phase 1 — Trade Operations Deep-Dive
- Shadowed LC and BG desks across multiple shifts to understand real “desk-level” flows and pain points.
- Mapped end-to-end journeys: client request → branch/RM → trade ops → compliance → core systems → client notification.
- Quantified rework, bottlenecks and compliance exceptions by corridor and product.
Phase 2 — Trade Hub Blueprint
- Defined a unified trade case object model (LC, BG, collections) including documents, parties, limits, collateral and exceptions.
- Co-designed a common discrepancy taxonomy and SLA framework with Trade Ops and Compliance.
- Identified key decision points where AI/document automation would add value without creating black boxes.
Phase 3 — Hub Build & Initial Use Cases
- Built the Trade Intake & Case Creation app, replacing multiple email templates and branch forms.
- Implemented document AI and rule-based checks for LC issuance (import LCs as anchor use case).
- Digitised maker-checker flows, discrepancy logging and structured client responses in Power Apps.
Phase 4 — Compliance Integration & Scale
- Integrated with existing AML/sanctions platforms; mapped alerts and dispositions back to trade cases.
- Extended automation to BG issuance and amendments, reusing patterns and components.
- Rolled out the hub across selected corridors and top-tier corporate clients.
Phase 5 — Optimisation & Playbook
- Set up monthly trade performance and control tower reviews using the hub dashboards.
- Enabled Trade Ops leads to adjust routing, SLA thresholds and documentation rules via configuration tables.
- Documented a playbook to onboard new products/corridors in 8–12 weeks based on the same pattern.
6. Technical Architecture — Layered View
7. Reusable Trade Finance Pattern for New Products & Corridors
The outcome was a Trade Finance Automation Hub pattern that the bank can reuse beyond the initial LC/BG use cases. New products, corridors and client segments are onboarded by configuring rules and integrations, not by launching fresh IT projects.
8. Outcomes & KPIs
| KPI | Before | After Sapnity Trade Hub |
|---|---|---|
| LC issuance turnaround time | 4–7 business days | 2–4 business days, with clarity on exceptions |
| BG issuance turnaround time | 5–9 business days | 3–5 business days for standard BG types |
| Files requiring rework > 1x | 35–45% | < 18% after digitised checks |
| Manual touchpoints per LC | 10–14 | 5–7 with digitised flows and system-assisted checks |
| Time to onboard new product/corridor | 9–15 months | 8–12 weeks using the hub pattern |
The Trade Finance Automation Hub has become the operational backbone for the bank’s trade services, visibly improving client experience and internal control.
9. Sapnity Differentiators
- Trade-ops reality, not just theory: Designed around actual trade desks, not just reference architecture slides.
- Control + efficiency together: Improved TAT and capacity without weakening maker-checker and compliance controls.
- Pattern-first implementation: Created a reusable trade hub pattern that compresses future rollouts for products and corridors.
- Respect for existing cores: Orchestrated existing trade systems and AML engines instead of attempting risky rip-and-replace.
- ALM and governance baked in: Managed solutions, configuration-driven rules and change pipelines aligned with bank IT controls.
For this global bank, Sapnity turned trade operations from a patchwork of trackers into a digitally orchestrated hub that can evolve with regulation, client demand and product innovation.