WhatsApp and Telegram +44 7563 115980
[email protected]
Dow Jones's risk data business, covering sanctions, PEP and adverse media data, monitoring and a payment screening feed, with research on firms owned by sanctioned parties.
Dow Jones Risk & Compliance scores 2.8 out of 5 (56 out of 100) in the Buckingham Intelligence Sanctions and Adverse Media Screening Index 2026 and ranks 8 of 12. It is strongest for banks and investment firms needing ownership data on sanctioned parties, with 5 out of 5 for screening coverage. Not published or not stated on the pages read: pricing, data, matching and security and clients.
Scores from the Sanctions and Adverse Media Screening Index 2026.
| Segment | Score out of 100 | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| For payment and e-money firms | 55 | 8 of 12 |
| For banks and lenders | 57 | 8 of 12 |
| For crypto firms | 56 | 8 of 12 |
The score out of 5 is the overall score out of 100 divided by 20. Leader goes to the top three overall, Best for to the first in each segment, and Top rated for to a score of 5 out of 5 on a criterion. Awards cannot be bought.
Where it scores best, and where to check closely, as shown in each ranking.
Banks and investment firms needing ownership data on sanctioned parties.
What Dow Jones Risk & Compliance publishes on its own pages, read on 26 October 2026.
Dow Jones's risk data business, covering sanctions, PEP and adverse media data, monitoring and a payment screening feed, with research on firms owned by sanctioned parties. It publishes a record count and an ISO 27001 page. It publishes no prices, update frequency or named clients.
| Fact | What the provider publishes |
|---|---|
| Coverage | Sanctions list data, AML/KYC due diligence on customers, "high-volume screening and always-on monitoring", Factiva news for adverse media, and a "high-frequency data feed for real-time screening of incoming and outgoing payments". |
| Pricing | Not published on the pages read. |
| Data | "More than 4 million records on entities and individuals"; "nearly 54,000 entities owned or controlled by sanctioned individuals or entities"; sanctions lists "continuously monitored and updated" (no frequency stated). |
| Matching | "Sanctions data and search logic" and "leading AI technology"; no matching method published. |
| Integration | "Data delivery is tailored to your compliance needs and can be via feeds, APIs, partner integrations or within applications"; web-based search tool. |
| Security and clients | Site footer links to "ISO 27001" and "ISAE 3000 & Data Quality Reports". No clients named on the pages read. |
| Date read | 26 October 2026 |
A fact that is not published is scored as not offered or, for a fee, as if it were high. It is never estimated.
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: dowjones.com/business-intelligence/risk, dowjones.com/business-intelligence/risk/….
Each score with the evidence behind it.
Each criterion is scored 0 to 5 against the best published offer in the Sanctions and Adverse Media Screening Index. 0 means not offered or not published. How it is scored
The other providers in the same ranking, ordered by score.
| Provider | Score out of 5 | Rank | Strongest for |
|---|---|---|---|
| ComplyAdvantage | 4.5 | 1 of 12 | Payment and e-money firms wanting full coverage with a published monthly price table |
| dilisense | 4.0 | 2 of 12 | Smaller payment and crypto firms wanting low published per-check prices |
| Castellum.AI | 3.8 | 3 of 12 | US banks and fintechs wanting very fresh data and automated alert review |
| sanctions.io | 3.8 | 4 of 12 | Fintechs and crypto firms wanting hourly list updates and quick API set-up |
| LSEG World-Check | 3.4 | 5 of 12 | Banks and larger firms wanting an established risk database with a free trial |
| OpenSanctions | 3.1 | 6 of 12 | Crypto and payment firms wanting the clearest published per-query prices and traceable sources |
| Facctum | 2.9 | 7 of 12 | Banks and payment firms wanting fast payment screening and a choice of hosting region |
| Napier AI | 2.7 | 9 of 12 | Banks wanting screening and monitoring on one platform with strong security credentials |
| Sanction Scanner | 2.6 | 10 of 12 | Smaller firms wanting one plan for screening, adverse media and daily monitoring |
| Ripjar | 2.4 | 11 of 12 | Large banks wanting entity-based screening across many languages |
| Moody's Grid | 1.6 | 12 of 12 | Banks wanting a broad risk database to feed their own screening systems |
Side by side on every criterion, fact and award.
Head-to-head comparisons cover pairs within the top five of each ranking. Dow Jones Risk & Compliance is compared with its alternatives in the table above.
Tell us what you need and where you operate.