B

Crypto Sanctions Screener

3.15

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Binance Iran sanctions violation firing incident
→
Step 2 Growing sanctions compliance demand at crypto exchanges
→
Step 3 Sanctions screening automation SaaS for small-to-mid-size exchanges/fintechs

Problem

Korean Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs), required by the Special Financial Transactions Act to perform sanctions screening, must manually cross-reference OFAC/UN/EU sanctions lists. Global sanctions lists are updated 2-3 times per week, and mid-size exchanges processing 10,000+ transactions per month need 1-2 dedicated staff. Non-compliance risks business suspension and penalties.

Solution

When cryptocurrency wallet addresses and transaction records are connected via API, the system: (1) performs real-time matching against OFAC/UN/EU/Korea Financial Services Commission sanctions lists, (2) detects indirectly connected (2-hop) risky addresses through blockchain on-chain analysis, (3) auto-generates STR (Suspicious Transaction Report) drafts compliant with the Special Financial Transactions Act. Auto-rescans and alerts when sanctions lists are updated.

Target: Small registered VASPs (5-20 employees), fintech startups with cryptocurrency payment integrations, VASP compliance consultants
Revenue Model: API usage-based: 1,000 transactions/month base at ~$75, ~$0.08 per additional transaction, Enterprise at ~$370/mo (unlimited + auto STR generation + dedicated support)
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
2.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
2.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (64%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
15.0/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (58/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
12.0/15
Solo Buildability
5.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Data Pipeline [medium] Backend [medium] Frontend [low]
Dashboard