Vellum SearchNEWThe living record — thousands of verified records, growing daily Search the record →
ProductCoverageSample brief How it worksMethodologyMCP Integration AboutDiscuss coverage

Regulatory intelligence, turned into usable judgement.

Choose one or multiple regulatory ecosystems and receive structured intelligence shaped to your exposure.

Live registryContinuously tracked
174 ecosystems·22 jurisdictions·Explore the full map →
Human-ledEvery brief reviewed and signed off by a named editor before delivery.
AI-scaled174 ecosystems across 22 jurisdictions — a production workflow only AI makes possible.
Lower costA fraction of the cost of equivalent in-house research or traditional advisory capacity.
24-hour deliveryBriefs aligned to the ecosystems and cadence selected at onboarding.

Regulatory change isn’t the hard part to find.

The hard part is knowing what matters, what is credible, and what requires attention — faster than alerts can tell you and more consistently than internal teams can produce. Vellum is built around the gap between regulatory volume and decision-ready judgement.

Regulatory overload

Alerts and newsletters create noise. Internal teams rarely have time to triage and analyse against their specific exposure.

Cost of internal capacity

Standing up a regulatory research function — or retaining senior advisory firms — is expensive and slow to scale across jurisdictions.

Cross-jurisdictional gap

The most consequential regulatory questions sit between regimes. Most providers cover one jurisdiction; Vellum draws the connections for you.

A structured intelligence brief.

Every Vellum brief is anchored to a defined coverage window and built around the same architecture: what changed in the period, what it means operationally, what remains uncertain, and what to watch on a 30/60/90-day horizon. Each development carries a status, a confidence rating, a date, a named actor, and an assessment of the likely landing zone.

The same standard applies whether a brief covers DSA enforcement, GCC financial regulation, or several separately maintained ecosystems selected for a client. Source ratings, evidentiary treatment, and explicit treatment of uncertainty are non-negotiable.

See the full sample brief →
DSA Enforcement · Sample 15–27 March 2026

1. Commission opened formal proceedings against Snap Inc.

Formal proceedings — five-area investigation
High
26 March 2026
European Commission

The Commission opened formal proceedings against Snap Inc. under DSA Articles 34–35 (systemic risk) to investigate whether Snapchat is ensuring a high level of safety, privacy, and security for children. The investigation covers five areas including age assurance, grooming risk, and access to illegal goods.

The five-area scope and the absorption of the Dutch DSC investigation signal that the Commission assessed sufficient evidence to proceed to formal proceedings rather than issue a preliminary RFI — pointing to interim measures or preliminary findings within 6–12 months absent proactive remediation.

From those who have used Vellum.

“Insightful, clearly structured, and demonstrated the added value that Vellum Intelligence can bring.”
European regulator
“The brief covered exactly the cross-jurisdictional issues we needed. The depth of analysis and discipline exceeded our expectations.”
UK consulting firm

The regulatory environment we monitor.

174 separate regulatory ecosystems across 22 jurisdictions, organised by thematic area.

Where geopolitics shapes regulation — investment screening, foreign subsidy rules, platform restrictions, cross-border data controls — we track those instruments as regulation, not as commentary.

A more disciplined way to track change.

We scope coverage to the question, gather and structure evidence within the period, distinguish fact from inference from uncertainty, and deliver a single structured output. Recurring clients receive cumulative coverage: each brief shows what is genuinely new, what remains stable, and where attention should focus next.

See methodology in full →

Built for decisions, not for reading.

Choose one or multiple ecosystems relevant to your exposure. The editorial standard and human sign-off remain consistent.