Due diligence questionnaires exist to help firms assess the risks posed by counterparties, service providers and other third parties.
The trouble is that a single questionnaire can run to hundreds of responses, the vast majority of which are routine, while a handful buried among them may need real scrutiny. For compliance and oversight teams, that imbalance has long meant hours spent reading line by line to catch the few answers that actually matter.
Zeidler Group has built a new AI Questionnaire Review feature directly into its Zeidler Due Diligence (ZDD) platform, aimed at helping reviewers focus their attention where it is genuinely needed rather than scanning every response equally.
At the click of a button, the tool assesses a completed questionnaire and sorts each answer into one of three categories: Satisfactory, Flagged or Unanswered. Flagged and unanswered responses are then grouped into a single panel, letting reviewers jump straight to the areas that warrant closer inspection rather than working sequentially through the whole document. A response such as “We do not maintain a cybersecurity policy” might be unambiguous in isolation, but easy to lose within a lengthy questionnaire, which is precisely the kind of gap Zeidler’s tool is designed to catch.
Crucially, each flagged item comes with a plain-English explanation, whether that’s an incomplete answer, missing information, or content suggesting a possible compliance, regulatory or operational concern. A flag is not a verdict, but a prompt for the reviewer to decide whether clarification, evidence or escalation is required.
Zeidler notes that DDQ review is rarely a one-off exercise. Answers get updated, evidence gets submitted, and questionnaires get reassessed. The AI Questionnaire Review tool can be re-run whenever responses change, so reviewers aren’t forced to start each subsequent round from a blank page.
Zeidler also positions the feature as a way of improving consistency across review teams, applying the same structured first pass regardless of an individual reviewer’s experience or familiarity with a given counterparty, while leaving final judgement calls to them.
The feature sits inside ZDD itself, rather than requiring questionnaires to be exported to a separate tool and reimported once analysed, a workflow Zeidler argues erodes much of the time saved elsewhere.
Zeidler frames the tool’s purpose not as replacing reviewers but as reducing the time they spend hunting for issues in the first place, freeing them to focus on investigation, judgement and follow-up.
For more, read the full story here.
Read the daily FinTech news
Copyright © 2026 FinTech Global
Copyright © 2026 RegTech Analyst
