Why Velocity’s Annual Churn Stays Under 1% 

We don’t usually share churn numbers publicly, but this one feels worth sharing: Velocity’s annual churn sits below 1%.   

For context, RegTech and FinCrime SaaS averages 6.5% to 11.4%. Broader B2B SaaS can run anywhere from 5% to 35% depending on the segment.  

It’s a number I’ve thought about a lot, because the easy explanations don’t hold up. It isn’t the lowest price in the market. It isn’t the most polished UI. Both matter, but neither is what stops a compliance team from running an RFP.  

Here’s what I believe is actually behind it.  

The product was built by practitioners  

Velocity was designed by AML and fraud SMEs who’ve sat in compliance seats and answered to regulators. That shapes the product in ways that don’t always show up on a feature comparison sheet.   

Audit trails are written for the questions an examiner actually asks. Risk model documentation is built to be defended, not just exported. When a regulator pushes on the underlying logic of a sanctions hit, the answer is a click away.  

This is the part that’s hard to retrofit. You either built it that way from the start or you didn’t.  

Integration depth, and a platform that earns its keep  

Once Velocity is wired into core banking, payments, KYC vendors, and downstream reporting, it stops being software and starts being infrastructure. That kind of integration depth raises the cost of switching, no question.  

But switching cost alone only explains why a client doesn’t leave for the first year or two. It doesn’t explain a ten-year retention curve. What does is whether the platform keeps producing returns. Across our suite, we typically see a 70-80% reduction in false positives, depending on the quality of the underlying data.   

One Tier-3 regional bank cut alert investigation time from 45 minutes to 15 after deploying our tool. That’s a 65% reduction. Their team now handles three times the case volume with the same headcount.  

Returns like that compound. Each quarter, the analyst workload gets lighter. Each audit cycle, compliance walks out with stronger documentation. The case for switching to a competitor gets harder to make, not easier.  

Relationships, and a roadmap shaped by clients  

Most of our clients have known the team for years. They work with the people building the product, not just the AE who sold the contract. In a category where compliance leaders often outlast the platforms they buy, that continuity matters more than people credit.  

It also affects what we ship. Recent Sanctions screening enhancements and our EDD module both came directly out of client conversations, not an internal roadmap exercise. We build what they tell us they need, and we don’t charge them again to use it.  

What this number does, and doesn’t, tell you  

Low churn isn’t automatic proof of a great product. Some vendors hold onto clients through switching cost and inertia alone.   

So, I’ll be honest about what under 1% does and doesn’t say.  

It says clients renew. It says we haven’t given them a reason to start looking elsewhere. On its own, it doesn’t prove we’re the right fit for any specific institution.  

If you’re evaluating FinCrime platforms, three questions are worth asking every vendor on your shortlist.   

What’s their net retention?   

How many of their references have been with them more than three years?   

What did they ship in the last twelve months that came directly from client feedback?   

Those answers tell you more than a feature matrix will.  

We were included on the FinCrimeTech50 2026 list earlier this year, which we’re glad to be recognized for. I believe this low churn is one of the reasons, it shows we are delivering real value.  http://www.fincrimetech50.com/   

If you’re evaluating FinCrime solutions and want a straight conversation about fit, get in touch.