What methodologies can AML auditors use for testing?

The chosen answer of observation, reperformance, document review, and interviews highlights methodologies that are practical and effective for AML auditors in their testing processes. These methods enable auditors to gather comprehensive, firsthand evidence regarding anti-money laundering controls and compliance procedures within an organization.

Observation allows auditors to directly see procedures in action, providing real-time insights into how controls are implemented and followed in practice. Reperformance lets auditors replicate processes or calculations to verify that they are accurate and effective. Document review is crucial for assessing the adequacy of policies, procedures, and supporting documentation in ensuring compliance with AML regulations. Lastly, interviews with staff provide qualitative insights and can help auditors understand how well staff comprehend and adhere to AML practices, potentially revealing knowledge gaps or areas for improvement.

In contrast, other options like market analysis and forecasting, surveys and focus groups, and self-assessments and peer reviews, while they may have their place in broader organizational assessment tools, do not align as closely with the practical, evidence-based methodologies necessary for thorough AML auditing. They might not provide the direct, observable evidence needed to ensure the effectiveness of AML controls and thus are not typically favored in this specific context.