Ethics & Integrity
Fraud Risk Register
Fraud risk that is not registered and rated is fraud risk managed by anecdote; the register is what turns suspicion into a controllable exposure.
Why a Fraud Risk Register Matters
A structured fraud risk register is the backbone of a fraud-prevention programme, and both King IV and the anti-corruption framework underpinning PRECCA expect entities to identify their fraud risks and assess the controls against them. Without a register, fraud risk is managed by anecdote, and the residual exposure is never quantified. AuditPro Core maintains identified fraud risks with residual ratings and control coverage so the audit committee can see where exposure remains highest and direct prevention effort accordingly.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Fraud risks logged
57
High residual risks
11
▼ 2
Controls effective
73%
Risks without owner
3
Fraud risks by residual rating
Top fraud risks
| Risk | Residual | Controls | Effective % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Procurement collusion | High | 4 | 68 |
| Payroll ghosts | Medium | 3 | 79 |
| Asset theft | Medium | 5 | 82 |
| Bribery | High | 3 | 61 |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
Inherent vs Residual Risk
Inherent risk is the exposure before controls; residual is what remains after them. The residual rating is what should drive action, because it reflects the exposure the entity actually carries.
Control Coverage
Each fraud risk should be mapped to the preventive and detective controls intended to mitigate it. A high-residual risk with thin control coverage is precisely where the next loss is most likely.
Fraud Scheme Typology
Classifying risks by scheme type, such as procurement fraud, payroll fraud or asset misappropriation, sharpens prevention. Typology helps target controls and analytics at the specific ways fraud actually occurs.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- Residual rating: each fraud risk carries inherent and residual ratings so attention follows real exposure.
- Control mapping: risks are linked to their mitigating controls to expose thin coverage.
- Continuous monitoring: high-residual risks are flagged for ongoing analytics and testing.
- Audit-ready export: the register exports as input to the fraud-prevention plan and audit committee reporting.
Key Takeaways
- Residual rating, not inherent, should drive where prevention effort goes.
- A high-residual risk with thin controls is where the next loss is likeliest.
- Scheme typology sharpens controls against how fraud actually occurs.
- A live register turns scattered suspicion into a quantified, controllable exposure.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.