Make the autonomous economy
governable, and therefore priceable.

Material decisions are moving from people to machines, and AI risk is already being excluded rather than priced. Arkaya makes governability observable, so what machines now decide can be priced: by insurers first, then by all capital.

Arkaya occupies the translation layer only. It produces no evidence and it prices nothing.

Organisations that can evidence their governance create options unavailable to those that cannot: at insurance renewal, at refinancing, and at exit.

Governance evidence record GET-v1 · continuous
Third-party access control
helpdesk access logs · continuous
open signed
Privileged-access review
IAM change log · event-triggered
clear signed
Model-override governance
override log · monthly review
in review signed
Incident notification
regulator-of-record filing · on event
in progress filed
Board protocol adherence
decision log vs protocol · monthly
within bounds signed
provenance: source system engine signing key · each hop retained in the record
record sealed · sig 0x8f3ac21e9b47d05e proof checked, no call to Arkaya · score: null
Format specimen · illustrative values · no client data · no score issued
The difference

GRC and AI-governance platforms record your compliance. The schema makes it evidence a counterparty can price.

Standards describe what should exist. Underwriting prices what demonstrably exists on the date risk attaches. The evidential gap between those two propositions is the opportunity.

That evidence is scoped to your audit, expressed in each vendor's proprietary controls and scores, and held inside the platform that produced it.

None of them supplies the schema that makes governance evidence comparable, portable and adjudicable across parties. Comparable by conformance to one shared schema, not a proprietary score. Portable across engines, insurers and capital events without re-basing. Adjudicable when parties dispute what it shows, resolved against the schema, not against opinion. Arkaya stewards the schema; it is not the adjudicator.

Where this sits
Accumulation  · the firm's balance sheet
Pricing outcomes compound into resilience capital.
Allocation  · the capital allocators
Insurers, reinsurers, lenders. They decide the price.
The schema says what the record shows. The carrier decides what it is worth.
Translation  · ARKAYA
The schema. Structure only: did the control exist, did it operate, did it pass its own test.
Observation  · the production layer
ERP, GRC, identity, cyber, telemetry. Every engine produces events. None produces price.

That visibility is what insurability and financeability rest on: a business's capacity to carry its liabilities and obligations, priced on what the record shows.

See how the schema does it →

Priced after the event

Automated decisions have already crystallised nine and ten figure losses, reconstructed only after the event. The trail those reconstructions assembled too late is the trail Arkaya produces continuously.

Automated decisioning · Government · Australia
A$2.4bn
total repayment and compensation

Robodebt averaged annual income across fortnightly periods and raised welfare debts later ruled unlawful. A$1.8bn was settled in 2020, a further A$475m (about US$309m) in 2025. A royal commission found the responsible department held legal advice warning of unlawfulness in 2018 and proceeded. The decision trail surfaced years after the loss. In the schema: the unlawful-calculation control carries an open exception from the moment that advice lands, readable by a counterparty years before settlement.

Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme, final report 2023; Reuters, 2025.

Model governance · Corporate · United States
$540m+
inventory write-down, Zillow Offers

Algorithmic home-buying priced off the Zestimate model, which overpaid as the 2021 market turned. A $304m write-down in Q3 2021, a further $240m to $265m guided for Q4, the unit closed and about 2,000 staff cut, a quarter of the workforce. The model outputs existed internally. A record a counterparty could check did not. In the schema: the model-override governance field shows the Zestimate's widening error as a populated exception in Q3, not after the write-down.

Zillow Group SEC Form 8-K, third quarter 2021.

Third-party · cyber · Retail · United Kingdom
≈15%
of M&S equity value at the point of impact

The April 2025 cyber incident, attributed to Scattered Spider operating through the TCS-run helpdesk, sat inside a multi-year outsourcing arrangement renewed on cost. Insurance performed against the loss it covered: roughly £100m of proceeds settled £101.6m of booked incident costs almost exactly, and did not reach the equity value the market removed. Arkaya's composed estimate puts the total equity-value impact near £2.4bn. In the schema: the third-party access-control obligation carries an open exception at the helpdesk boundary, readable by an underwriter at renewal, not reconstructed at claim.

Cyber Monitoring Centre, 2025 (Category 2, with Co-op, £270m–£440m); M&S market disclosures, 2025.

Today’s forensic evidence is retrospective. Arkaya makes forensic evidence prospective.

See what a governance evidence record looks like

The proposition

Two pillars.

Arkaya stewards the Governance Evidence Taxonomy, the open schema counterparties read to price governance risk. Arkaya GET Solutions is the commercial work that runs on it. Pick your path.

Observable governance becomes measurable. Measurable governance becomes priceable. Priceable governance becomes resilience capital.

Resilience Capital is built.
Not asserted.