How is sensitive data protected?

All documents are encrypted with AES-256-GCM at rest and TLS 1.3 in transit. A GDPR anonymization layer removes PII before any AI processing. Your data never leaves our SOC 2 certified infrastructure.

How long does integration take?

Less than 30 minutes. Upload documents directly, connect via OAuth for Slack, or use our REST API for bulk processing.

How does outcome tracking work?

Outcomes are detected automatically from follow-up documents, Slack messages, and web intelligence. You confirm with one click. Each reported outcome makes your future analyses more accurate.

How is Decision Intel different from ChatGPT?

ChatGPT gives one opinion from one model. Decision Intel uses 3 independent judges for noise measurement, a 20×20 bias interaction matrix for compound scoring, 31 domain-specific biases, and an outcome flywheel that gets smarter with every decision.

All case studies

FailureFinancial Services2012

JPMorgan Chase

JPMorgan London Whale Trading Losses

Estimated impact: $6.2B

F37

Decision Quality Index

Critical — 3 biases detected, 1 toxic combinations

JPMorgan's Chief Investment Office accumulated massive synthetic credit derivative positions that resulted in $6.2 billion in trading losses. Trader Bruno Iksil's positions grew unchecked as risk models were manipulated and senior management dismissed early warnings.

Decision context

Whether to reduce or hedge the CIO's growing synthetic credit portfolio as positions exceeded internal risk limits in early 2012.

Deep hindsight-stripped analysis coming soon. This case is part of our ongoing backfill to reconstruct what the platform would have flagged at decision time. The summary and bias profile below are drawn from primary sources.

Biases present in the decision

★ Overconfidence BiasAnchoring BiasGroupthink

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

JPMorgan Chase — 3 biases, 1 toxic combination

Drag to rotate · Scroll to zoom · Click to explore

Decision

Critical

High

Medium

Toxic

Bias Intensity Profile

Severity × confidence across 3 detected biases

Toxic combinations

Yes Committee

Reference class base rates

Across all 146 curated case studies in our library:

90%

base failure rate

10%

base success rate

Lessons learned

Risk models that can be manually overridden without independent review create dangerous blind spots.
When traders mark their own positions, conflicts of interest can obscure true risk exposure.
A culture where challenging senior traders is discouraged allows losses to compound.

Source: U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, "JPMorgan Chase Whale Trades" Report (2013) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

See what we'd flag in your next strategic memo.

Upload a strategic memo or board deck. Get the same bias audit you just saw for JPMorgan Chase, on your own high-stakes call, in under 60 seconds.

Try the Demo — Free Request a Pilot

Or leave your email, we'll run a strategic memo of your choosing and send the readout within a business day.

Ready to audit your own memo right now? Create a free account →

Related cases in Financial Services

Catastrophic failure2008

Lehman Brothers

Lehman Brothers Collapse

Catastrophic failure2007

Bear Stearns

Bear Stearns Hedge Fund Collapse

Catastrophic failure1995

Barings Bank

Barings Bank Collapse