Integration Basics

Integration patterns for Fund Analyst Intelligence, from low-friction pilots to production-grade API and workflow integrations.

Integration Basics

Fund Analyst Intelligence can be adopted in stages.
You do not need a deep integration to start.
You do need clear ownership, source policy, and output expectations.

This page describes the most common integration patterns.
It also defines the data surfaces that are typically exchanged.

Integration principles

Start with workflow integration, not systems integration

Most value comes from running the monthly validation cycle.
A pilot can run with manual uploads and standard outputs.
System-to-system integration can follow once trust is established.

Treat evidence and provenance as first-class

Integration should preserve source links, versions, and timestamps.
Without provenance, outputs become hard to defend.
Evidence is part of the contract.

Prefer stable contracts and explicit versioning

Production teams need predictable outputs.
APIs and export formats should be versioned.
Breaking changes should be managed explicitly.

Core integration surfaces

1. Inputs (what you provide)

A. Document artefacts

  • DDQs, factsheets, decks, letters
  • operational documents, fee schedules
  • internal notes and decisions (optional)

B. Source policy configuration

  • allowed online sources (allow-list)
  • recency and freshness rules
  • retention expectations

C. Fund reference data (optional)

  • internal fund identifiers
  • portfolio membership and tags
  • manager relationships

2. Outputs (what you receive)

A. Validated fund profile
Structured fields representing the current validated state.

B. Exceptions and alerts
Prioritised issues, change events, and follow-up items.

C. Reports and evidence packs
Monthly memos, quarterly pack sections, and provenance bundles.

D. Audit trail
Cycle history, approvals, and decision records.

Integration patterns

Pattern 1 — Manual pilot (lowest friction)

Best for: first pilots and early rollout.

How it works

  • artefacts uploaded manually or via shared folder
  • monthly memo delivered as PDF/HTML
  • evidence pack delivered alongside reports
  • exceptions reviewed inside the product

Pros

  • fastest time to value
  • minimal IT dependency
  • proves workflow usefulness

Considerations

  • requires disciplined document handling
  • scale-out needs automation of ingestion

Pattern 2 — Shared storage (document workflow integration)

Best for: teams with a document management platform.

How it works

  • ingest from a shared folder or document store
  • publish reports back to a defined location
  • preserve version metadata and access control

Pros

  • aligns with existing operational practice
  • reduces manual upload steps
  • improves traceability

Considerations

  • requires stable naming conventions and permissions
  • define retention and archival rules

Pattern 3 — Data export (batch integration)

Best for: firms wanting structured outputs in internal systems.

How it works

  • export validated fund profile fields on a schedule
  • export exceptions and alerts as structured events
  • downstream systems consume the exports

Typical formats

  • JSON exports
  • CSV extracts for analytics pipelines
  • packaged bundles for governance records

Pros

  • decouples systems
  • simple to implement and operate
  • works well for analytics teams

Considerations

  • define export schemas and versioning
  • define id mapping between systems

Pattern 4 — API integration (production-grade)

Best for: platforms requiring real-time access and automation.

How it works - push/pull fund profiles, exceptions, and cycle status via API
- integrate with your UI, CRM, or governance tooling
- optionally trigger cycles or approvals through workflow controls

Pros

  • supports automation and scale
  • enables richer downstream experiences
  • improves operational visibility

Considerations

  • requires stable API contracts
  • requires auth model alignment and audit logging
  • define rate limits and operational SLAs

Pattern 5 — Notification and escalation integration

Best for: organisations with established escalation channels.

How it works

  • route material alerts and breaches to your chosen channel
  • include evidence links and recommended actions
  • capture closure and decisions back into the system

Pros

  • integrates with real operating behaviour
  • increases adoption
  • makes monitoring actionable

Considerations

  • define what qualifies as an alert
  • avoid alert inflation
  • preserve decision trails

Identity and mapping

Most partners have internal identifiers.
Fund Analyst Intelligence supports mapping between:

  • internal fund ids and external identifiers
  • manager entity ids and fund family relationships
  • portfolio membership tags and strategy classifications

This mapping should be established early.
It reduces confusion and improves portfolio-level reporting.

Operational readiness checklist

Before moving beyond a pilot, confirm:

  • source allow-list and retention rules are documented
  • approval workflow and roles are defined
  • materiality thresholds and alert types are agreed
  • output templates are signed off
  • export or API contracts are versioned
  • logging and audit expectations are aligned

Integration is not only a technical topic.
It is an operating model topic.
Production success depends on both.

Next step

If you want a minimal integration plan, start with the Pilot playbook.
If you already know your target environment, align on contracts and governance, then integrate incrementally.