ACAMS CAMS Quick Review

Quick review for CAMS candidates: AML/CFT risk-based controls, CDD/EDD, sanctions, investigations, reporting, governance, and common exam traps.

Quick Review for CAMS Candidates

This quick review is for candidates preparing for the ACAMS Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (CAMS) exam, code CAMS, offered by ACAMS. Use it to refresh high-yield concepts before moving into topic drills, mock exams, and detailed explanations.

This page is independent review support. It is not affiliated with ACAMS and does not replace the official exam materials, current candidate guidance, or applicable laws and regulations in your jurisdiction.

High-Yield CAMS Review Map

AreaWhat to know coldCommon exam trap
Money laundering processPlacement, layering, integration; purpose of each stageAssuming every laundering scheme shows all three stages clearly
Terrorist financingFunds may be legal or illegal; focus is support of terrorismTreating terrorist financing as identical to profit-driven laundering
Risk-based approachHigher risk gets stronger controls; lower risk may receive simplified controls where allowedBelieving risk-based means “ignore low risk”
Customer due diligenceIdentify and verify customers; understand ownership, purpose, expected activity; monitor over timeTreating CDD as a one-time onboarding task
Enhanced due diligenceApplied to higher-risk customers, products, geographies, or behaviorAssuming EDD always means automatic account closure
Beneficial ownershipIdentify natural persons who own or control legal entities or arrangementsStopping at the company name or nominee
PEPsPolitically exposed persons require risk-sensitive review and controlsAssuming all PEPs are criminals or must be rejected
Sanctions screeningList screening, ownership/control issues, escalation, documentationConfusing AML suspicious activity monitoring with sanctions screening
Transaction monitoringDetect unusual activity compared with profile, peers, and known typologiesFiling solely because an alert fired without investigation
Suspicious activity reportingEscalate, document rationale, preserve confidentiality, avoid tipping offTelling the customer a report was or will be filed
AML governanceBoard/senior management oversight, compliance function, training, independent testingThinking compliance alone “owns” all AML risk
InvestigationsGather facts, analyze context, decide, document, escalate/report as requiredIgnoring negative findings because customer is profitable

Core AML, CFT, and CPF Concepts

Money Laundering Stages

StageGoalTypical activityDetection focus
PlacementIntroduce illicit value into the financial systemCash deposits, casino activity, money services, purchases of monetary instrumentsCash activity, structuring, unusual source of funds
LayeringObscure origin, ownership, or audit trailMultiple transfers, shell companies, cross-border movement, crypto hops, trade manipulationComplex movement without clear business purpose
IntegrationReintroduce funds as apparently legitimateReal estate, luxury goods, investments, loans, business revenueSource of wealth, asset purchases, inconsistent income

Exam point: Placement is often easiest to detect because cash enters regulated channels. Layering is often the most complex. Integration gives criminal proceeds an appearance of legitimacy.

Terrorist Financing vs. Money Laundering

ConceptMoney launderingTerrorist financing
Primary objectiveConceal illegal origin and enjoy proceedsFund terrorist activity or organizations
Source of fundsUsually criminal proceedsMay be legal, illegal, or mixed
Transaction sizeCan be large, complex, or structuredMay involve small amounts
Detection challengeTrace criminal proceedsIdentify purpose, network, destination, and behavior
Key controlsCDD, monitoring, reporting, law enforcement cooperationCDD, sanctions, watchlists, monitoring, nonprofit/charity controls

Trap: Terrorist financing can involve clean money moving for an illicit purpose. Do not focus only on criminal source.

Proliferation Financing

Proliferation financing involves providing funds or financial services connected to weapons proliferation, restricted goods, sanctioned actors, or prohibited procurement networks. High-yield clues include:

  • Dual-use goods.
  • Complex shipping routes.
  • Front companies.
  • Sanctioned jurisdictions or entities.
  • Unusual trade documentation.
  • Transshipment through high-risk locations.
  • Payments inconsistent with the stated business.

The Risk-Based Approach

The risk-based approach is central to CAMS. Controls should be proportionate to risk.

Inherent Risk, Controls, and Residual Risk

TermMeaningExample
Inherent riskRisk before controlsPrivate banking for high-net-worth foreign clients
ControlsMeasures used to reduce riskCDD, EDD, screening, monitoring, training
Residual riskRisk remaining after controlsRisk after the firm applies due diligence and monitoring

A practical risk assessment asks:

  1. Who are the customers?
  2. Where are they located or transacting?
  3. What products and services are used?
  4. How are services delivered?
  5. What transaction types and volumes are expected?
  6. What controls exist?
  7. What residual risk remains?

Core Risk Categories

Risk categoryHigher-risk indicatorsControl response
CustomerPEPs, shell companies, cash-intensive businesses, complex ownership, nonresident customers, high-net-worth clients, MSBs, charities/NPOsEDD, ownership verification, source of funds/wealth review
GeographySanctions exposure, corruption, weak AML controls, secrecy jurisdictions, conflict zones, high-crime regionsCountry risk scoring, enhanced review, sanctions controls
Product/serviceWire transfers, correspondent banking, trade finance, prepaid access, private banking, virtual assetsProduct-specific monitoring and limits
ChannelNon-face-to-face onboarding, intermediaries, agents, digital-only activityStrong identity verification, device/IP controls, agent oversight
TransactionUnusual volume, structuring, rapid movement, round-dollar transfers, no business rationaleAlerts, investigation, escalation

Risk-Based Does Not Mean

  • Ignoring low-risk customers.
  • Accepting all high-risk customers.
  • Applying the same controls to everyone.
  • Replacing judgment with a risk score.
  • Treating documentation as optional.

It means the institution uses documented judgment to apply stronger or different controls where the risk is greater.

Customer Due Diligence Quick Review

CDD Objectives

CDD is designed to help the institution know who the customer is, who controls or benefits from the relationship, what activity is expected, and whether activity remains consistent with the customer profile.

CDD componentPurposeCandidate reminder
Identify the customerEstablish who is seeking the relationshipIncludes individuals and legal entities
Verify identityUse reliable information or documentsRequirements vary by jurisdiction and institution
Understand purpose and natureKnow why the account or service is neededExpected activity supports monitoring
Identify beneficial ownersLook through legal entities to natural personsDo not stop at nominees or shell entities
Ongoing monitoringCompare actual behavior to expected behaviorCDD continues after onboarding
Update informationRefresh when risk or facts changeTriggered by events, reviews, or unusual activity

Beneficial Ownership

Beneficial ownership focuses on the natural persons who ultimately own, control, or benefit from a legal entity or arrangement.

High-yield points:

  • Legal ownership and beneficial ownership may differ.
  • A nominee, trustee, or corporate director may not be the true controller.
  • Complex structures can be legitimate but require understanding.
  • Control may exist through ownership, voting rights, management authority, contractual control, or other influence.
  • If ownership is opaque, the risk is higher and may require escalation.

Enhanced Due Diligence Triggers

EDD is commonly associated with:

  • PEPs and close associates or family members.
  • High-risk jurisdictions.
  • Complex or opaque ownership.
  • Unusual source of wealth or source of funds.
  • High-risk products such as private banking, correspondent banking, trade finance, or virtual assets.
  • Adverse media or criminal allegations.
  • Activity inconsistent with the customer profile.
  • Sanctions proximity or heightened geopolitical risk.

EDD may include:

  • Senior management approval where required by policy or regulation.
  • More detailed source of funds and source of wealth analysis.
  • Additional identity, ownership, and control documentation.
  • More frequent reviews.
  • Lower thresholds for alerting.
  • Review of public records, adverse media, litigation, or regulatory history.
  • Clear documentation of rationale.

Source of Funds vs. Source of Wealth

ConceptMeaningExample question
Source of fundsOrigin of the specific funds used in a transaction or accountWhere did this wire deposit come from?
Source of wealthHow the customer accumulated overall wealthHow did this customer become wealthy?

Trap: A bank statement may support source of funds, but it may not explain source of wealth.

PEPs, High-Risk Customers, and Special Customer Types

Politically Exposed Persons

A PEP is a person who holds or has held a prominent public function. Risk can also extend to close family members and close associates.

Key review points:

  • PEP status is a risk factor, not proof of wrongdoing.
  • Domestic, foreign, and international organization PEPs may be treated differently depending on law and policy.
  • Risk depends on role, jurisdiction, access to public funds, corruption risk, products used, and transaction behavior.
  • EDD often focuses on source of wealth, source of funds, expected activity, and ongoing monitoring.

High-Risk Customer Types

Customer typeWhy risk may be higherReview focus
Cash-intensive businessEasier to mix illicit cash with legitimate receiptsCash patterns, revenue reasonableness, tax/business records
Shell companyMay obscure ownership or purposeBeneficial ownership, business rationale, transaction purpose
Trust or legal arrangementControl and benefit may be separatedSettlor, trustee, protector, beneficiaries, control powers
Money services businessHigh transaction volume, remittances, agentsLicensing/registration where applicable, agent oversight, monitoring
Nonprofit or charityPotential diversion or abuse for terrorism financingPurpose, beneficiaries, geography, governance, payments
Private banking clientHigh value, complex services, confidentiality expectationsSource of wealth, PEP/adverse media, complex structures
Correspondent banking customerIndirect access to foreign bank customersRespondent bank AML controls, payable-through risk
Virtual asset businessSpeed, pseudonymity, cross-border movementWallet exposure, blockchain analytics, sanctions risk

Sanctions and Screening

Sanctions compliance and AML monitoring are related but not the same.

TopicAML suspicious activity monitoringSanctions screening
Main questionIs activity suspicious or inconsistent?Is there a prohibited or restricted party, country, vessel, good, or interest?
TimingOften ongoing and post-transaction, depending on productOften at onboarding and before/around transaction processing
OutputAlert, investigation, possible reportHit disposition, block/reject/escalate per law and policy
EvidenceCustomer profile, behavior, typologiesList match, ownership/control, identifiers
Main riskFacilitating laundering or financial crimeDealing with sanctioned parties or prohibited activity

Screening Match Review

A screening match is not automatically a true hit. Review:

  • Name similarity and aliases.
  • Date of birth or incorporation.
  • Address and nationality.
  • Identification numbers.
  • Ownership and control.
  • Vessel, aircraft, wallet, or other identifiers.
  • Transaction counterparties and intermediaries.
  • Geographic links.
  • Quality of data and transliteration issues.

Sanctions Evasion Red Flags

  • Use of shell or front companies.
  • Sudden changes in trade routes.
  • Vague goods descriptions.
  • Payments routed through unrelated third parties.
  • Use of intermediaries in high-risk jurisdictions.
  • Ownership changes shortly before transactions.
  • Avoidance of obvious references in payment messages.
  • IP, shipping, or documentation inconsistencies.
  • Links to dual-use goods or restricted sectors.

Transaction Monitoring and Suspicious Activity

Unusual vs. Suspicious

TermMeaningRequired response
Unusual activityActivity not expected for the customer or peer groupReview, investigate, seek explanation
Suspicious activityActivity with facts suggesting possible money laundering, terrorism financing, sanctions evasion, fraud, or other crimeEscalate and report as required by law/policy

Exam trap: An alert is not the same as suspicion. Alerts require investigation and disposition.

Investigation Workflow

    flowchart TD
	    A[Alert, referral, subpoena, adverse media, or law enforcement request] --> B[Gather customer profile and expected activity]
	    B --> C[Review transaction details and counterparties]
	    C --> D[Compare activity to customer risk and known typologies]
	    D --> E{Reasonable explanation?}
	    E -->|Yes| F[Document rationale and close or monitor]
	    E -->|No or unresolved| G[Escalate to AML compliance / investigations]
	    G --> H{Suspicion threshold met under policy/law?}
	    H -->|Yes| I[File required report and maintain confidentiality]
	    H -->|No| J[Document no-file rationale and consider ongoing monitoring]
	    I --> K[Consider account restrictions, exit, or enhanced monitoring]
	    J --> K

Common Suspicious Activity Red Flags

PatternPossible concernKey context to check
Structuring/smurfingAvoiding reporting or detection thresholdsRepeated cash activity below thresholds; related parties
Rapid in-and-out movementLayering or pass-through activityNo business purpose; funds leave quickly
Round-dollar wiresPossible scripted or noncommercial transfersCustomer type and transaction history
Third-party paymentsConcealed beneficial ownership or fraudRelationship among parties
Unusual cash depositsPlacement of illicit proceedsBusiness model and cash revenue
Dormant account reactivationAccount takeover or launderingCustomer contact, source of new funds
Multiple accounts with similar activityNetwork behaviorShared addresses, phones, IPs, signers
High-risk geography movementSanctions, corruption, trafficking, terrorism financingCounterparty, goods, purpose
Inconsistent occupation/incomeFalse profile or mule activityPayroll, tax, employment, account use
Use of funnel accountsGeographic layeringDeposits in many locations, withdrawals elsewhere

Suspicious Activity Reporting Principles

Jurisdiction-specific requirements vary, but the exam commonly tests these principles:

  • Escalate internally according to policy.
  • Do not tip off the customer.
  • File required reports when the applicable suspicion threshold is met.
  • Document the facts, analysis, and decision.
  • Keep reports and related information confidential.
  • Continue monitoring if the relationship remains open.
  • Consider whether account restrictions, exit, or enhanced controls are appropriate.
  • Cooperate with competent authorities through approved legal and internal channels.

AML Program Governance

A sound AML program is not just software. It requires governance, accountability, controls, testing, and culture.

Core AML Program Elements

ElementPurposeWhat to remember
Board/senior management oversightSet risk appetite and support complianceTone from the top matters
Policies and proceduresTranslate law and risk appetite into operating rulesMust be practical and kept current
AML compliance officer/functionCoordinates program and escalationNeeds authority, independence, and resources
Risk assessmentIdentifies and measures AML/CFT riskDrives control design
CDD and EDDUnderstand customers and riskOngoing, not one-time
Transaction monitoringDetect unusual and suspicious activityScenarios must match risk
Sanctions screeningPrevent prohibited dealingsRequires quality data and escalation
TrainingHelps staff detect and escalate issuesRole-based training is stronger
Independent testing/auditEvaluates design and effectivenessShould be independent of the process tested
Recordkeeping and reportingPreserves evidence and regulatory complianceDocumentation is critical

Three Lines of Defense

LineTypical roleAML example
First lineOwns and manages risk in the businessRelationship managers collect CDD and identify unusual activity
Second lineOversight, policy, advisory, monitoringAML compliance sets standards and reviews escalations
Third lineIndependent assuranceInternal audit tests AML program effectiveness

Trap: The first line cannot outsource all responsibility to compliance. Business units own the risk they generate.

Independent Testing

Independent testing should assess whether controls are designed well and operating effectively. It may review:

  • Customer risk scoring.
  • CDD and EDD files.
  • Beneficial ownership documentation.
  • Sanctions screening disposition.
  • Transaction monitoring alert quality.
  • Suspicious activity investigations.
  • Reporting timeliness and quality, where applicable.
  • Training completion and relevance.
  • Governance and management information.
  • Prior issue remediation.

International AML Standards and Bodies

FATF Concepts

The Financial Action Task Force, often referenced in AML study, is central to international AML/CFT/CPF standards.

ConceptWhy it matters
FATF RecommendationsGlobal framework for AML/CFT/CPF controls
Risk-based approachCountries and institutions should identify, assess, and mitigate risk
Mutual evaluationsAssess national AML/CFT systems
High-risk and monitored jurisdictionsAffect geographic risk assessment
Beneficial ownership transparencyHelps prevent misuse of legal persons and arrangements
Targeted financial sanctionsSupports counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation controls
FIUsReceive and analyze suspicious transaction/activity reports

Other Commonly Tested Concepts

Concept/bodyReview point
Financial Intelligence UnitNational center for receiving and analyzing suspicious reports
Egmont GroupNetwork for cooperation among FIUs
Basel CommitteeBanking supervision standards and risk management principles
Wolfsberg GroupIndustry guidance, especially for correspondent banking and financial crime controls
UN sanctionsInternational sanctions measures implemented through national systems
Mutual legal assistanceFormal cooperation between jurisdictions in investigations
Regulatory supervisionExaminers assess program adequacy and compliance

Correspondent Banking

Correspondent banking allows one financial institution to provide services to another, often across borders. It is high risk because the correspondent may have limited visibility into the respondent bank’s customers.

Key Risks

  • Nested relationships.
  • Payable-through accounts.
  • Weak respondent AML controls.
  • High-risk jurisdictions.
  • Shell banks.
  • Poor transparency over originators and beneficiaries.
  • Sanctions exposure.

Due Diligence Focus

QuestionWhy it matters
Who owns and controls the respondent bank?Ownership may create sanctions, corruption, or secrecy risk
Where is it licensed and supervised?Regulatory quality affects risk
What is its customer base?Indirect exposure can be significant
What AML controls does it have?Correspondent relies partly on respondent controls
Does it permit nested access?Hidden third-party banks increase risk
Are payable-through services offered?Customers may transact directly through correspondent account
What geographies and products are involved?Drives EDD and monitoring

Trap: A correspondent bank must understand the respondent relationship; it usually cannot identify every underlying customer in normal correspondent activity, but it must manage the risk appropriately.

Trade-Based Money Laundering

Trade-based money laundering uses trade transactions to move value and disguise proceeds.

Common TBML Methods

MethodDescriptionRed flags
Over-invoicingPrice is inflated to move extra valuePrice inconsistent with market
Under-invoicingPrice is reduced to shift value to buyerUnusually low declared value
Multiple invoicingSame goods invoiced multiple timesDuplicate documents or financing
Over/under-shipmentQuantity differs from documentationWeight or volume mismatch
Phantom shipmentDocuments show goods that were not shippedNo shipping evidence
MisdescriptionGoods described falselyVague or inconsistent product detail
Third-party paymentsUnrelated party pays or receivesNo clear commercial rationale

TBML Review Clues

  • Goods inconsistent with customer business.
  • Unusual shipping route.
  • Inconsistent invoice, bill of lading, and payment data.
  • Newly formed companies with high trade volume.
  • Use of free trade zones without clear need.
  • Dual-use goods or sanctioned-sector exposure.
  • Repeated amendments to letters of credit.
  • Payments from or to unrelated offshore entities.

Virtual Assets and Emerging Payment Risk

Virtual assets are high-yield because they combine speed, cross-border reach, pseudonymity, and evolving regulation.

Key Concepts

TermReview point
Virtual assetDigital representation of value that can be transferred or used for payment/investment
VASPBusiness providing virtual asset services, depending on local definitions
WalletAddress or tool used to hold/send/receive virtual assets
Hosted walletCustodian controls or manages access
Unhosted walletUser controls wallet directly
Blockchain analyticsHelps identify exposure to illicit wallets, mixers, darknet markets, sanctions, scams
Mixer/tumblerObscures transaction trail
Chain hoppingMoving value across different cryptoassets or blockchains

Virtual Asset Red Flags

  • Exposure to darknet markets, ransomware wallets, scams, or sanctioned wallets.
  • Use of mixers or privacy-enhancing services without clear rationale.
  • Rapid conversion from fiat to crypto and out again.
  • Multiple wallets controlled by the same customer without business purpose.
  • Activity inconsistent with customer age, occupation, or wealth.
  • IP addresses, device data, or geolocation inconsistent with profile.
  • Structuring deposits to buy virtual assets.
  • Use of high-risk exchanges or weakly controlled platforms.

Investigation and Evidence Handling

Strong Investigation Habits

StepWhat good looks like
Define the issueIdentify why the alert or referral matters
Collect factsCustomer profile, account history, transaction details, counterparties
Analyze contextCompare activity to expected behavior and known typologies
Seek explanationUse available records and approved customer contact procedures
Review negative informationAdverse media, sanctions proximity, law enforcement requests
DecideClose, monitor, escalate, restrict, or report
DocumentFacts, reasoning, evidence, decision-maker, date
Protect confidentialityLimit access and avoid tipping off

Quality Documentation

Good documentation answers:

  • What happened?
  • Why was it unusual?
  • What facts were reviewed?
  • What explanation was found?
  • Why was the activity considered suspicious or not suspicious?
  • Who approved the decision?
  • What follow-up action is required?

Trap: A conclusion without reasoning is weak. “No suspicious activity found” is not enough unless the file explains why.

Common AML Typologies

TypologyTypical indicatorsControl focus
Drug trafficking proceedsCash deposits, structuring, funnel accounts, high-risk locationsCash monitoring, geographic analysis
Human traffickingMultiple hotel/transport payments, payroll anomalies, third-party control, unusual cashBehavioral patterns, victim indicators
Corruption/briberyPEP links, consulting fees, government contract payments, offshore entitiesPEP EDD, source of wealth, third-party payments
Fraud/scamsIncoming victim payments, rapid withdrawals, mule accountsAccount behavior, complaints, law enforcement requests
Tax evasionOffshore structures, undeclared income patterns, nominee ownershipBeneficial ownership and source of funds
Sanctions evasionFront companies, trade route changes, vague payment messagesScreening, ownership/control, trade review
Terrorist financingSmall transfers, high-risk regions, NPO abuse, network linksCFT monitoring, sanctions, charity due diligence
Cybercrime/ransomwareCrypto flows, exchanges, mixers, darknet linksBlockchain analytics, VASP controls
Trade-based launderingInvoice manipulation, unusual goods/routes, third-party paymentsTrade document review and pricing checks

Exam Decision Rules

Use these practical rules when answering scenario questions.

If the Scenario Shows a Red Flag

Do not jump straight to “file a report” unless the facts meet the suspicious reporting threshold in the scenario. The usual best answer is often:

  1. Investigate.
  2. Gather context.
  3. Compare to customer profile.
  4. Escalate internally if unresolved.
  5. File/report if suspicion is established under policy and law.
  6. Document the rationale.

If the Customer Is High Risk

High risk usually means apply EDD and monitoring, not automatic rejection. Exit or decline may be appropriate if:

  • Identity or beneficial ownership cannot be verified.
  • Activity lacks a lawful or reasonable purpose.
  • Sanctions or prohibited exposure exists.
  • Required information is refused.
  • Risk exceeds the institution’s risk appetite.
  • The institution cannot manage the risk.

If the Question Mentions Tipping Off

The safe principle is confidentiality. Staff should not tell the customer that a suspicious activity report has been or will be filed. Customer contact, if needed, should be handled carefully and according to policy.

If the Question Mentions Senior Management

Senior management and the board are responsible for oversight, risk appetite, resources, and culture. They do not usually perform day-to-day alert investigations, but they must ensure the program is effective.

If the Question Mentions Audit

Independent audit/testing evaluates the AML program. It should be independent from the activity being tested and should report findings for remediation.

If the Question Mentions “Best Next Step”

Look for the answer that is:

  • Risk-based.
  • Documented.
  • Escalated through proper channels.
  • Consistent with policy and law.
  • Protective of confidentiality.
  • Focused on facts rather than assumptions.

Common CAMS Candidate Mistakes

MistakeBetter approach
Memorizing definitions without applying themPractice scenario-based questions and explain the decision
Treating every red flag as proof of crimeRed flags require investigation and context
Confusing CDD, EDD, and monitoringCDD identifies and understands; EDD deepens review; monitoring tests activity over time
Assuming PEPs must be rejectedPEPs require risk assessment and often EDD
Ignoring beneficial ownershipAlways look for natural persons who own or control
Equating sanctions hits with AML alertsSanctions hits require list-match analysis and legal/policy action
Forgetting terrorist financing can use legal fundsFocus on destination, network, and purpose
Missing the role of documentationA decision is only defensible if documented
Choosing “close account” too quicklyInvestigate, escalate, and consider legal/reporting implications
Overlooking the first line of defenseBusiness units own customer and product risk

Rapid Final Review Checklist

Before practice questions, make sure you can explain:

  • The difference between placement, layering, and integration.
  • Why terrorist financing can involve legitimate funds.
  • How inherent risk, controls, and residual risk relate.
  • The main components of a risk-based AML program.
  • What CDD is designed to establish.
  • When EDD is appropriate.
  • How beneficial ownership differs from legal ownership.
  • Why PEP status is a risk factor, not an accusation.
  • The difference between unusual and suspicious activity.
  • Why tipping off is prohibited or restricted.
  • How sanctions screening differs from transaction monitoring.
  • What makes correspondent banking higher risk.
  • How trade-based money laundering manipulates value.
  • How virtual assets can be used to layer funds.
  • What good investigation documentation includes.
  • How independent testing supports program effectiveness.

Practice-Ready Topic Drills

Use this quick review as a bridge into independent companion practice. For efficient review, drill these topics separately before taking full mock exams:

  1. AML/CFT fundamentals: stages, terrorist financing, proliferation financing.
  2. Risk-based approach: customer, geography, product, channel, transaction risk.
  3. CDD and EDD: beneficial ownership, PEPs, source of funds, source of wealth.
  4. Sanctions and screening: false positives, true hits, ownership/control, evasion.
  5. Monitoring and reporting: alerts, investigations, suspicious activity decisions.
  6. Governance: roles, policies, training, independent testing, three lines of defense.
  7. Typologies: trade-based laundering, virtual assets, corruption, trafficking, fraud.
  8. Scenario judgment: best next step, escalation, documentation, confidentiality.

For each missed question in your question bank, write down:

  • The issue tested.
  • The red flag or control concept.
  • The decision rule you should have applied.
  • Why the correct answer is better than the tempting answer.

Next Step

After reviewing this page, move into original practice questions by topic. Start with your weakest CAMS areas, read the detailed explanations carefully, then use mixed question-bank sets and mock exams to build exam-ready judgment.