SanctionsAI vs AMLBot
An honest comparison of SanctionsAI and AMLBot for teams deciding where automated screening belongs.
TL;DR
TL;DR: AMLBot offers AML address checks and investigation tools for manual review. SanctionsAI is a screening API for the agent path — one HTTP/MCP call before a payment, under 100 ms. If a human runs the check, AMLBot-style tools work; if an agent does, you need the API.
What AMLBot does well
- AML address checks with risk scoring
- Investigation and transaction history tools
- Accessible pricing for occasional checks
Where AMLBot falls short for agent payments
- Manual, human-in-the-loop workflow by design
- Not built for sub-100 ms pre-payment decisions at agent volume
- Coverage depth vs OFAC-specific lists varies (verify current docs)
Where SanctionsAI wins
- Agent-native screening: HTTP, MCP, CLI — before settlement
- 947 OFAC wallets, 19,218 names, 16 jurisdictions, hourly sync
- Free tier, $19/mo dev plan, MIT-licensed self-host
When to use which
AMLBot for manual due-diligence and investigation. SanctionsAI for the automated screen-before-sign step. They are complements, not substitutes.
Methodology
Methodology
Scoring dimensions: screening scope (wallets/names/jurisdictions), agent-path support (HTTP/MCP/CLI), latency, pricing model, and self-hosting. Each score level: Low = not documented or limited, Medium = partial, High = strong and documented. Not scored: SOC 2 and certifications we cannot verify, private-beta features, and internal policies. Re-evaluated quarterly; next review 2026-11.