A bank’s vendor questionnaire looks like a form, and its answers live with your finance, legal, security, engineering, continuity, privacy, facilities, HR, governance and deal people.
Visibly reads the documents you already have, tells you what each row is really asking and which rule sits behind it, and shows you the gaps before the bank finds them.
No certificate ends this review. Not SOC 2, not ISO 27001, not even OSPAR. The bank still runs its own. And it adds two to four months to a deal you’ve already spent four months winning.
Your own documents. No bank questionnaire needed.
Visibly will not be your lawyer, your auditor or your CISO. It tells you which of them the questions were written for, and what you already have that answers them.
A questionnaire looks like one job: security, probably, or compliance, handed to whoever is closest to the deal.
Entity-level controls reads as a single domain. Count it above. It feeds six of the ten desks: governance and risk, information security, commercial and delivery, people, legal, and compliance. Nothing in the name says so.
In a large firm these are ten teams. In a thirty-person firm they are whoever is closest to the deal.
The file lands with whoever is closest to the deal. The answers sit with people in other functions, who often do not know the question was asked.
The certificate, the policy, the BCM plan and the pen test report all say something. Only one of them answers the row, and only if you cite the right section.
Risk review is not a conversation. The deal slows, then stops. The reasons stay inside the bank, in a file you will never read.
Your existing pack: ISO certificate, SOC 2, security and BCM policies. If a bank has already sent you its questionnaire, add it and we answer it row by row. If not, we assess you against the criteria the bank will use.
The questionnaire is optional. Without one, we assess against the bank’s own criteria.
Every row answered from your evidence, with the regulation behind the question named and the source document and section cited.
Work the amber and red rows, replace what is thin, and download the completed file in Excel or Word, colour-coded as the reviewer will read it.
Drafts answers from the answers you gave before.
Measures success in hours saved.
Jurisdiction-agnostic: the same answer for every regulator.
Repeats a weak answer faithfully, including the one that was rejected last time.
Built from the bank’s side of the table, by people who reviewed these submissions.
Measures success in whether your evidence survives the review.
Every question mapped to the Singapore rule behind it: MAS 658, MAS Outsourcing, OSPAR, PDPA.
Flags what the risk team will reject, before they see it.
Four parts to every row: the question as the bank wrote it, the rule behind it in plain English, the answer drawn from your documents, and the verdict. Select a row to read the reviewer’s note.
Service delivery spans three locations: Singapore (primary operations and hosting, cloud region ap-southeast-1), the United Kingdom (engineering), and Australia (customer support). Production systems and backups remain in the Singapore cloud region; no customer data is stored or processed outside Singapore. Data residency for this engagement is contractually restricted under our Data Processing Agreement, Appendix D.
Locations are enumerated, residency is bounded, and every claim traces to a certificate or report. A reviewer can verify this without a follow-up question.
For years we sat on the bank’s side of this table, reviewing vendor submissions and deciding which ones went forward.
Most of the companies that failed did not fail because their controls were weak. They failed because their evidence did not answer what the regulation was actually asking, and nobody on our side was allowed to tell them so. We wrote the rejection; they received a delay. Visibly is that reviewer’s judgment, turned into software and put on the vendor’s side of the table.
The desks that experience came from: named by function, not by institution
If you run sales, revenue, or enterprise accounts at a technology firm selling into Singapore’s banks, the risk review is the one stage of your pipeline you can’t see and can’t forecast: two to four months between a signed champion and booked revenue. Visibly turns it into a work list your team closes in days, before the questionnaire goes back.
Anyone can read the questionnaire. Knowing which answers survive the review is the hard part.
You sell software or services into Singapore’s financial sector, often from outside Singapore, often without a compliance team of your own. If a bank has sent you a questionnaire, or is about to, this is built for you.
Selling to an insurer, an asset manager or a payments licensee instead? Of the 84 criteria, one is bank-specific. Ask us about the rest.
You send the questionnaires. When vendors run them through Visibly first, what returns is evidenced, cited and mapped to the regulation you are assessing against: fewer empty rows, fewer rounds.
You already guide technology firms into Singapore’s regulated market: market entry, compliance readiness, the deals themselves. Visibly slots into that engagement: run your client’s pack against the bank’s rubric, open the meeting with the gap list, and spend your hours closing gaps instead of hunting them. If you’d package this into your service, talk to us.
A third-party risk practitioner tested the first-pass output and wrote this assessment of it.
“I was impressed by Visibly’s first-pass output. The risk assessment report was bank-grade and met the standard expected of a robust third-party risk assessment: responses were relevant to the control checks, supporting evidence was cited, and gaps were clearly highlighted. It provided the key information a risk practitioner needs to make an informed decision, all within minutes rather than hours or days.”
“I would be comfortable recommending Visibly TPRM to vendors seeking to do business with financial institutions in Singapore.”
Third-party risk management practitioner at a Singapore bank
A personal view, not a bank’s endorsement and not a customer reference.
Your documents are processed only to produce your assessment.
They are never used to train AI models, ours or anyone else’s.
Results and uploads are deleted automatically after a fixed retention window.
Processing and storage are hosted in Singapore.
Upload the documents you already have. You will see where a Singapore bank’s risk team would stop you, and exactly what closes each gap. If you already have the bank’s questionnaire, add it and we answer it row by row.
visibly