Saepium

Compliance, quantified.

One assessment. Two outputs: your compliance status against the frameworks that govern you, and the dollar cost of what's still exposed, calculated the moment you finish answering.

Request a demo See how it works

Validated across financial services, energy and critical infrastructure, and fintech. Built on ISO 27001, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS Controls v8.1, SOC 2, SWIFT CSCF, and OT security. Aligned to FAIR-MAM.

The gap

Your compliance assessment already contains your risk number. Nobody is reading it that way.

Compliance tools tell you what you're missing against a framework. Quantification tools tell you what missing it would cost.

Most organizations buy one, then buy the other, then pay two vendors to ask their control environment two different questions from two different starting points. The answers rarely agree, because they were never built from the same data.

Saepium routes the same assessment through both questions at once.

What you complete for your auditor is what calculates your loss exceedance curve. One workflow. No second data pull. No two numbers to reconcile in the board deck.

How it works

01 / Answer your framework.

Complete the assessment for the framework that governs you: ISO 27001, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS Controls v8.1, SOC 2, SWIFT CSCF, or OT security. The same guided format your auditor already expects.

How it works

02 / Watch your risk price itself.

Every answer routes through a Bayesian engine that recalculates your dynamic risk register in real time. Each finding traces to a dollar figure, not a severity label.

How it works

03 / Simulate before you spend.

Soon: toggle a control investment, an insurance limit, or a threat scenario and watch the loss exceedance curve move before you commit budget to it.

Coming

The output

One curve. Every dollar threshold, priced by probability.

The loss exceedance curve is the number behind the platform: at every loss amount, the probability that your annual losses exceed it. A board, a regulator, and an underwriter can all read the same line.

Illustrative loss exceedance curve showing the probability that annual losses exceed each dollar amount 0% 20% 40% 60% $0 $5M $10M $15M $20M Probability of exceeding Annual loss amount Read it in one line: the probability that annual losses exceed $5M
Illustrative curve. Output shape only, not customer data.
Why now

The window regulators gave you is closing on a published date.

In the Philippines, BSP Circular No. 1213 pushed every BSP-supervised institution, banks, e-money issuers, lending platforms, toward stronger authentication and fraud controls, on a compliance runway that closed around June 2026.

BSP-supervised institutions reported more than 5.8 billion pesos in cyber-incident losses in 2024, ahead of the year before. The regulator is not slowing down, and neither is the exposure.

Globally, the same pattern is compounding.

DORA has been in active enforcement since January 2025, with the first full supervisory cycle now complete. NIS2 carries an October 2026 compliance deadline across EU member states, and the first NIS2 fines have already been issued. In the United States, CMMC 2.0's second phase begins rolling out to federal contractors later in 2026, and the SEC now enforces a four-business-day window for material incident disclosure.

None of these regimes ask if you are compliant. They ask you to prove it, on a calendar, with numbers a board member and a regulator can both read.

Proven in the field

Validated before the platform existed.

Four engagements, four sectors: financial services, energy and critical infrastructure, fintech, and humanitarian operations. Every one uncovered exposure the customer's existing tools had missed.

Read the customer stories

Stop paying for two answers when your assessment already has both.

See your own framework's risk number, calculated live, in a working session with our team.

Request a demo