Hybrid Retrieval Architecture
Combining semantic search, keyword matching and metadata filtering, tuned to the structure of financial documents rather than a generic RAG template.
Service
We build retrieval systems over your internal documents, contracts, filings and compliance corpora, so answers come with the actual source passage attached, not a plausible-sounding hallucination.
What it is
A large language model has no knowledge of your loan agreements, your internal policy documents, or the filing your compliance team submitted last quarter. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) closes that gap: the system searches your own document set for the relevant passages, and the model generates an answer grounded in what it found, with the source attached. Done well, this is the difference between an analyst copilot that's actually useful and one that gets quietly stopped being used after the first confidently wrong answer.
The hard part of RAG in finance is rarely the model call. It's the retrieval. Financial documents are long, dense, and full of numbers and defined terms that a naive chunking strategy shreds into meaningless fragments. We build hybrid retrieval, combining semantic search with keyword and metadata filtering, tuned against your actual document types: credit agreements, prospectuses, policy manuals, filings, internal memos. Every answer the system produces carries a citation back to the specific passage it used, so an analyst can verify it in seconds instead of trusting it blind.
We also build the evaluation layer most RAG projects skip: a test set of real questions with known correct answers, so you can measure retrieval accuracy and answer quality before rollout, and keep measuring it as your document set grows. Where the underlying documents are subject to access restrictions, such as client-confidential deal documents or non-public information, retrieval respects the same access controls the documents already carry, rather than treating the corpus as one flat pool.
What we build
Combining semantic search, keyword matching and metadata filtering, tuned to the structure of financial documents rather than a generic RAG template.
Chunking strategies that respect the structure of contracts, filings and policy documents, such as clauses, sections and defined terms, instead of splitting on a fixed character count.
Every generated answer carries a citation to the specific passage it drew from, so a reviewer can verify it directly rather than trusting the model's word.
Retrieval respects existing document permissions, such as client confidentiality, deal-team restrictions and need-to-know, rather than exposing the whole corpus to every query.
A test set of real questions with known correct answers, used to measure retrieval accuracy and answer quality before rollout and on an ongoing basis.
Systems that synthesize an answer across several documents, comparing terms across a set of agreements for instance, rather than retrieve a single passage.
Pipelines that keep the retrieval index in sync with the source document store, so a new filing or updated policy is searchable within your defined freshness window.
How we work
Review the document types in scope and the real questions users need answered, which shapes the chunking and retrieval strategy more than any generic best practice.
Build the chunking, indexing and hybrid retrieval pipeline against your actual documents, not a sample dataset.
Build a test set of real questions with verified correct answers, covering the range of document types and query patterns in scope.
Iterate on retrieval and generation parameters measured against the eval set, not intuition, until accuracy clears the bar your use case needs.
Ship with access controls, citation display and a pipeline that keeps the index current as your document set grows.
What to expect
5‑9 weeks
typical time from document access to a production-ready retrieval system
Cited answers
every generated response traceable to the source passage it used
Measured accuracy
retrieval and answer quality tracked against a real evaluation set, not a demo


Grounding and citation. The system is designed to answer only from retrieved passages and to show its source; where retrieval doesn't find a confident match, it says so rather than generating a plausible-sounding guess. We measure this directly with the eval set before rollout.
Yes. Retrieval is built to respect your existing document permissions, so a user's query only searches the documents they're already authorized to see. The corpus isn't flattened into one open pool.
Either. RAG pairs naturally with private deployment: the retrieval layer and the model can both run inside your VPC or on-prem, so retrieved document content never leaves your environment. See our private AI deployment service for that combination.
The sync pipeline tracks document versions and supersession, so retrieval surfaces the current version by default and can still answer questions about prior versions when explicitly asked. This matters for anything with amendment history.
It depends heavily on document type and question complexity, which is exactly why we build an eval set specific to your corpus rather than quoting an industry-wide number. We'll tell you the measured number for your system before it goes live, and keep tracking it after.
Explore more
A 30-minute call to scope what a first version would look like against your own data and systems.
Book a 30-min intro call