MENU
Which key risk indicator should the internal auditor consider when reviewing correspondent banking activities?
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium Advanced-CAMS-Audit Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
26 comments · newest first
AR
Arminda
11 months ago
I agree with D, but we shouldn't overlook A either!
ME
Mel
11 months ago
Wait, are we really saying D is the most critical? Seems a bit narrow.
TI
Tiera
11 months ago
C makes sense, more banks in risky areas means more exposure.
OZ
Ozell
12 months ago
I think B is also important, size matters in risk assessment.
GE
Georgeanna
1 year ago
Definitely D, those high-risk jurisdictions are a big red flag.
CO
Colton
1 year ago
I’m a bit confused about which indicator is most critical; I recall we talked about all these factors, but I can’t pinpoint the key one for this scenario.
BR
Brandee
1 year ago
I practiced a similar question about AML risks, and I feel like the termination of relationships might indicate underlying issues.
BA
Barney
1 year ago
I think the size of the respondent bank's operations could be relevant, but I’m leaning towards the number of banks in high-risk areas.
LA
Laurel
1 year ago
I remember discussing the importance of monitoring transaction volumes in class, but I’m not sure if that’s the best indicator here.
ER
Erick
1 year ago
I feel pretty confident about this one. The correct answer is C - the number of respondent banks located in higher-risk jurisdictions. That's the risk factor that an internal auditor would be most concerned with when reviewing correspondent banking activities.
LA
Launa
1 year ago
Ah, I've seen questions like this before. The number of respondent banks in higher-risk jurisdictions is definitely a key risk indicator that the internal auditor should focus on. That's the one that stands out to me as the most relevant.
JA
Javier
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. There are a few different risk factors mentioned, and I'm not sure which one would be the most important for an internal auditor to consider. I'll have to think this through carefully.
ME
Merilyn
1 year ago
This seems like a straightforward question about correspondent banking risks. I think the key is to focus on the risk factors that an internal auditor would consider, like the location and size of the respondent banks.
EM
Emerson
2 years ago
I believe the volume of transaction activity referred by the respondent bank is also important to consider.
BR
Brittni
2 years ago
I agree with Ivan, correspondent banking relationships in high-risk jurisdictions can pose greater AML/CFT risks.
IV
Ivan
2 years ago
I think the internal auditor should consider the number of respondent banks located in higher risk jurisdictions.
SH
Sheron
2 years ago
Haha, I bet the auditor is just hoping none of the respondent banks are located in Mordor or something. But yeah, C is the clear choice here.
TR
Tresa
2 years ago
User 4: Tresa, I agree. It's crucial for the internal auditor to consider all these factors when reviewing correspondent banking activities.
GE
Gerald
2 years ago
User 3: Gerald, I think you're right. Those high-risk jurisdictions can really increase AML/CFT risks.
NA
Nan
2 years ago
User 2: Nan, I agree. C) Number of respondent banks located in higher risk jurisdictions is definitely an important risk indicator.
ST
Stevie
2 years ago
User 1: Haha, I bet the auditor is just hoping none of the respondent banks are located in Mordor or something.
JO
Josefa
2 years ago
I agree, C is the way to go. You can't ignore the risks posed by banks in sketchy locations.
KA
Kathryn
2 years ago
C definitely seems like the right answer here. Correspondent banking with banks in higher-risk jurisdictions can be a major red flag for AML/CFT issues.
RU
Ruthann
2 years ago
It's crucial for internal auditors to pay attention to the size and stature of a respondent bank's operations in its home country as well.
LA
Laura
2 years ago
Yes, the number of respondent banks located in higher risk jurisdictions is an important key risk indicator to consider.
DA
Danilo
2 years ago
I agree, correspondent banking with banks in high-risk jurisdictions is definitely a red flag for AML/CFT issues.