Short answer
Ask a regulatory monitoring vendor what sources they monitor, where coverage is weakest, how alerts are matched to your products and markets, how citations are preserved, how false positives are handled, how review workflow works, and what data they need from you. Strong vendors should be comfortable discussing limits as well as strengths.
Ask for the Gap List
Every vendor has coverage limits. The useful question is whether they can explain them clearly and help you decide how to handle the residual risk.
A vendor that only talks about breadth may be hiding the operational question that matters: where could your team still miss something?
Test Relevance, Not Demos
Give the vendor a few real products, substances, markets, and source examples. Ask them to show how the system handles relevance and uncertainty.
A polished interface is less important than whether the result matches how your team actually reviews regulatory change.
Frequently asked questions
Should vendors provide their source list?
They should provide enough source transparency for your team to assess coverage and gaps, even if implementation details remain proprietary.
What should a trial prove?
A trial should prove source relevance, alert quality, review workflow, evidence traceability, and implementation effort against your real footprint.
Related questions
What should a regulatory monitoring trial prove?
A good trial uses real products, markets, substances, and source examples.
Read moreHow do you compare regulatory monitoring tools?
Use your real monitoring workflow as the test case.
Read moreWhat is a regulatory coverage gap list?
A transparent gap list is a trust signal, not a weakness.
Read more