Choosing Between kya/risk and kya/screening_v2
Both kya/risk and kya/screening_v2 assess the risk of a blockchain address, but they differ in the scope of what they evaluate. This page explains how the two relate and helps you pick the right one for each scenario.
In one sentence
Section titled “In one sentence”/kya/riskanswers a single question: “Is this address itself high-risk?” — fast, lightweight response, ideal for high-volume first-pass screening./kya/screening_v2goes further by also reviewing the address’s counterparties, reconstructing risk exposure, fund paths, and transaction details. It is the more comprehensive, compliance-grade screening endpoint.
The two are not a simple “lite / full” substitute pair: screening_v2 covers everything risk determines about the address itself and adds a counterparty risk view that risk cannot provide. When you need to reach a compliance decision, rely on screening_v2.
Positioning
Section titled “Positioning”/kya/risk — self risk of an address
Section titled “/kya/risk — self risk of an address”Calculates risk based only on the entities and labels directly associated with the target address, returning a risk level, risk score, and Risk Factors. It does not trace counterparties, so responses are typically millisecond-level.
Best for answering: “Is this address itself flagged as sanctioned, hack, scam, or otherwise high-risk?”
/kya/screening_v2 — comprehensive address screening
Section titled “/kya/screening_v2 — comprehensive address screening”In addition to reviewing the address itself, it continues to screen the address’s counterparties and evaluates the risk exposure they introduce through fund flows. It can return:
- The triggering rule for each risk (
rule_id/trigger_id) for audit traceability; - Counterparty risk exposure (direction, share, USD amount, hop count, paths);
- The underlying transaction details supporting the decision (hash, amount, token, timestamp, etc.);
- Sync / async modes, with screening strictness selectable via a compliance policy (
rule_set_id).
Best for compliance screening, KYC/KYT due diligence, and any workflow that needs a formal, auditable review outcome. Responses typically take about 2–3 seconds.
Capability comparison
Section titled “Capability comparison”| Aspect | /kya/risk | /kya/screening_v2 |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | Self-risk assessment of an address | Full screening: self risk + counterparty risk |
| Scope | Target address only | Target address + its counterparties |
| Counterparty review | No | Yes |
| Exposure / path analysis (exposure, paths) | No | Yes |
| Transaction details (transactions) | No | Yes |
| Rule traceability (trigger, rule_id) | No | Yes |
| Entities and labels (entities, labels) | Yes | Yes |
| Compliance policy selection (rule_set_id) | No | Yes |
| Sync / async modes | Sync only | Sync + async |
| Response time | Millisecond-level | ~2–3 seconds |
| Typical use | Fast, high-volume first-pass checks | Compliance screening, due diligence, formal review |
Same address, two views
Section titled “Same address, two views”Using the same address TEAqwfMhXLaomXhZ8KeMhx3njGmQEDnsUR, the capability gap becomes concrete.
/kya/risk flags the address itself as Blocked and Sanctioned (both from the address’s own labels) and returns a risk level of High:
"risk_factors": { "Blocked": [{ "origin": "self", "sub_origin": "label", "category": "Blocked", "level": "High" }], "Sanctioned":[{ "origin": "self", "sub_origin": "label", "category": "Sanctioned", "level": "High" }]}/kya/screening_v2 returns the same self risk and additionally surfaces a risk exposure from a sanctioned counterparty — information risk cannot provide:
"Sanctioned": [ { "origin": "Self", "sub_origin": "Label", "category": "Sanctioned", "level": "High" }, { "origin": "Direct Exposure", "sub_origin": "Label", "category": "Sanctioned", "level": "High", "exposure": { "direction": "Inbound", "amount_usd": 25700, "counterparty_address": "TAN6jFzDmmZVyE3GbL1B2qNfy4o3MX6U9D", "hop_count": 1 } }]screening_v2 further provides the full transaction details for that counterparty under counterparties (hash, token, amount, timestamp, etc.), making the risk decision verifiable and auditable.
How to choose
Section titled “How to choose”| Your scenario | Recommended endpoint |
|---|---|
| High-volume, high-frequency first-pass risk checks | /kya/risk |
| You only need to know whether the address itself is high-risk | /kya/risk |
| Compliance screening, KYC / KYT due diligence | /kya/screening_v2 |
| You need to review counterparty risk exposure from fund flows | /kya/screening_v2 |
| You need triggering rules and transaction details for an auditable outcome | /kya/screening_v2 |
Tip: use
/kya/riskas a low-cost first filter, then call/kya/screening_v2for deeper screening on the addresses that are flagged or uncertain.