World-Check: analytical study of the international database

World-Check is a global screening database designed to assess the risk profiles of individuals and organizations. Originally developed between 1999 and 2000, the database is now owned by Refinitiv. Banks, financial institutions, corporations, and government agencies rely on it to identify and evaluate compliance risks associated with their counterparties.

The database contains information on individuals and entities that may pose financial, legal, or reputational risks, including those linked to criminal activities, corruption, terrorism, and sanctions. While the data is compiled from public sources—such as news articles, court decisions, and sanctions lists—it frequently contains errors, outdated information, or inaccuracies.

Being listed in World-Check can have serious consequences: denial of financial services, frozen accounts, visa complications, and lasting damage to one's reputation. Despite these potential pitfalls, the database remains an essential tool for compliance checks and meeting regulatory requirements.

One of the primary concerns for those who find themselves in these databases is how to remove their information from the internet to minimize potential negative impacts. In this study, we examine in detail how these databases are compiled, what types of errors commonly occur, and what steps can be taken to correct inaccuracies or mitigate the damage from incorrect information.

What are World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance Databases, and Who Needs Them?

World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance are the world's leading databases for counterparty screening. They provide critical information for business due diligence procedures. World-Check maintains profiles of individuals and organizations linked to financial crimes, terrorism, corruption, and other illicit activities. Dow Jones Risk & Compliance offers a comprehensive database for counterparty verification, including information on sanctions, politically exposed persons (PEPs), and adverse media coverage.

While World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance are marketed as reliable risk assessment tools, the reality often falls short of this promise.

The lack of transparency in data collection and processing methods raises serious concerns. The companies behind these databases do not fully disclose their methodologies, making it difficult to assess the reliability of the information they provide. Furthermore, the absence of clear criteria for including individuals in these databases creates the risk of arbitrary decisions and potential abuse.

Orion Solutions Analysis Objectives

Our extensive experience over many years has allowed us to gather sufficient information to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the data contained in these databases. We aim to identify potential problems and limitations of these tools to help users apply them more effectively in their risk management processes.

How are World-Check and Dow Jones Databases Compiled?

World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance gather information from diverse sources in an attempt to present a comprehensive picture of potential risks associated with individuals and legal entities. It is important to understand that most of this information comes from open sources found through Google searches.

Official sources of information for these databases include:

1. public and commercial databases
2. sanctions lists from various countries and international organizations
3. legal documents: court decisions and other legal documents from different countries and international organizations
4. media publications
5. data on government organizations and state-owned enterprises
6. law enforcement databases
7. maritime vessel information

In our experience, the information sources for these databases are typically found on the first two pages of Google search results

While World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance publish general information about their methodologies and processes, the specifics of these procedures remain inaccessible to the general public. Data collection, analysis, and updates are performed manually. This makes it difficult for users and data subjects to understand the specific criteria and algorithms used for including information in the databases.

Despite claims about multiple and diverse sources, the specific resources are often not disclosed. This creates problems for information verification and can raise questions about data reliability and accuracy. Since users cannot always verify the origin of information, they are forced to rely on the good faith of information providers.

Companies that collect and analyze risk data operate globally. However, different countries have different laws, which makes it more challenging to ensure a uniform level of control and transparency in how these companies operate.

Risk Statuses and Flags: What Are the Consequences of Being Listed?

World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases are compiled from lists of individuals and legal entities associated with political structures (PEPs) and those who may pose potential risks to organizations in the context of financial crimes, corruption, terrorism, and other illegal activities.

Risks

What are the chances that you are already in the database? If you are a top executive at a major company or a business owner, your profile has likely already been created.

Distribution of individuals in databases by field of activity

• Executive: 64%
• Businessman: 47%
• Others: 24%
• Politician: 17%
• Relative of someone in the database: 13%

World-Check Statuses

PEP - Politically exposed persons

S - Under sanctions

RE - Subject to fines

LE - Under criminal investigation

SIP - Require special attention

RCA - Linked to high-risk individuals

OB - Organizations without status, require attention

Dow Jones Statuses

PEP - Politically exposed persons

SIE - Require special attention

SAN - Under sanctions

LE - On government watchlists

SCO - State-owned companies

AME - Negative media mentions

SOC - Controlled by sanctioned entities

Individuals or companies listed in World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases often face serious consequences, including financial losses, reputational damage, and business restrictions.

Profile subjects never receive direct notification about their inclusion in the databases or their assigned risk statuses. This is because World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance data are used as internal control and compliance tools, and data providers have no obligation to notify anyone about their inclusion in the lists.

Profile subjects may learn about their profiles through counterparties or partners who use these databases to screen their business relationships, or when financial institutions deny them services.

It is important to note that inclusion in World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases does not necessarily mean that an individual or organization has committed any wrongdoing. Rather, it is a tool for identifying potential risks that require additional verification as part of due diligence procedures. If a person is included in the database, it means their profile contains at least one negative status flag.

What is Wrong with Database Profiles?

33% of profiles contain serious errors

33% of records contain serious errors that can lead to significant legal and reputational consequences both for data subjects and for organizations using these databases in their risk management and compliance activities.

What errors did we find?

1. mistaken identity
2. outdated information about sanctions or violations
3. inaccurate or outdated information about business relationships
4. false information about criminal records
5. incorrect classification as PEP
6. fake biographical or professional data
7. errors in financial information
8. incorrect information about citizenship or residency

Examples of Database Errors

Example 1. The biographical data for an individual lists their birth year as 1981, when the correct year is 1980. An error in the date of birth can lead to false identification as someone with the same surname.

Example 2. An individual's profile contains information about Libyan citizenship, when their actual citizenship is Egyptian. Citizenship in certain countries, including Libya, is considered a high-risk factor by these databases due to elevated levels of financial crime.

Example 3. An individual's profile contains information about a government position and corresponding PEP status, although the person left that position more than 10 years ago. Outdated information can lead to negative compliance decisions.

24% of profiles designated as meeting criteria for sanctions

The grounds for marking a profile as meeting criteria for sanctions have no legal basis: this status was invented by the databases themselves, and they use it to flag people who are not actually sanctioned but who, in the database's opinion, meet the criteria for potential sanctions.

What errors did we find?

1. Errors in the connections section include incorrectly listed business or personal relationships with already sanctioned individuals or organizations, erroneously attributed family ties to people on sanctions lists, or misidentified partnerships with sanctioned companies.

Example: An individual's profile states they are a business partner of a sanctioned person, when in reality this person only met the sanctioned individual once at a public conference.

2. Biographical data errors include inaccuracies about places of employment, mistakes in dates of positions that could potentially fall under sanctions restrictions, as well as incorrect information about citizenship or residency in sanctioned countries.

Example: A profile states that an individual is a Russian citizen, when in fact they have been a citizen of Kazakhstan for several years and have no legal connection to Russia.

3. Problems with source validity include reliance on outdated news articles or unverified social media posts, as well as ignoring official refutations.

Example: Based on media coverage of industry events, a profile states that an individual owns a company whose business activities fall under sectoral sanctions, when in fact the company was liquidated several years ago.

4. Overly broad interpretation of sanctions criteria includes excessively expansive interpretation of the concept of "associated person" in the context of sanctions or automatically including all company employees in the risk group without considering their actual roles.

Example: All employees of "Company Ltd." mentioned in public financial documents were automatically placed on the sanctions list, including an individual who was merely a temporary contractor without access to the company's financial or strategic operations.

5. Failure to update data includes delays in updating information about lifted sanctions or changes in the status of individuals or companies.

Example: An individual's profile states they have been under sanctions since 2020. However, the restrictions were lifted back in 2022, but the database was not updated.

6% of profiles contain errors in listed connections

Business or political connections, from the perspective of World-Check and Dow Jones databases, represent any significant interactions or relationships between individuals, organizations, and political structures.

The databases may include both current and historical connections, often without clearly distinguishing their relevance. They can range from direct relationships (such as business partner) to indirect ones (such as member of the same industry association).

Business connections include corporate relationships such as shareholder, board member, or executive roles, as well as partnerships, client-supplier interactions, joint ventures, investment relationships, and consulting roles.

Political connections encompass membership in political parties or movements, family ties to political figures, financial contributions to political campaigns, lobbying activities, participation in government structures, and connections to politically exposed persons (PEPs).

Example: A profile states that an individual is a shareholder of "Company Ltd.," which is under sanctions, when in fact they sold their stake in the company several years ago. The database did not account for current information, and the connection to "Company Ltd." remains listed.

The concept of "Connections" aims to create a comprehensive picture of a data subject's relationships and is critically important for risk assessment, compliance, and making informed decisions in financial and business spheres. However, connections may be incorrectly listed in profiles for several reasons:

1. outdated information
2. unreliable or compromised data sources
3. data entry errors
4. incomplete personal data leading to incorrect identification
5. misinterpretation of public data without context or even deliberate distortion of information

3% of profiles contain fake biographical data

Fake data in the context of biographical information refers to distorted or completely fabricated details about a subject's life, career, or activities. Such data may include false information about residency, income or assets, non-existent political or business connections, as well as inaccurate information about marital status or family relationships.

All cases of profile falsification that we discovered happened because unreliable or compromising resources were used as sources of information.

Example: A profile states that an individual owns a major company with billion-dollar assets, when in reality they have no such property, and the listed assets are completely fictitious or greatly exaggerated. This information was taken from questionable sources not verified by official documents.

Example: A profile states that an individual is a trusted associate of a high-ranking political figure and participates in their businesses, when in fact they have never met, and no business or political relationships exist between them. The source of information turned out to be a compromised resource with false data.

Fake data enters these databases, most likely due to an uncritical approach to various questionable information sources. These include:

1. fake news websites
2. satirical or parody publications that were mistakenly interpreted as real news
3. unverified rumors and gossip from social networks, deliberately spread disinformation, as well as outdated or irrelevant sources

8% of profiles can be assigned a more negative status at any moment

Risk statuses in the database are dynamic and can be revised in either direction. For 8% of records, the status may be downgraded in the near future due to facts in the biographical data that were somehow overlooked by analysts and database algorithms.

The status review process can be triggered by various factors:

1. scheduled profile reviews by analysts
2. updates to risk assessment algorithms
3. emergence of new information that, combined with existing data, may change the overall risk assessment
4. changes in the geopolitical situation affecting the interpretation of existing facts

For data subjects, this situation creates a state of constant uncertainty. They may not realize they are on the verge of a status change, which in turn can suddenly affect their business relationships, access to financial services, and overall reputation.

Example: The database updated its algorithms, and now they begin to account not only for personal connections but also business relationships with sanctioned individuals. As a result of this update, an individual's profile falls into the high-risk category because they head a firm that is a business partner of a sanctioned individual.

98% of profiles in databases contain errors

Analysis of profiles in World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases has revealed an alarming picture. Only 2% of profiles from our sample can be considered completely accurate and up-to-date. The remaining 98% contain various errors and inaccuracies, ranging from minor to critical.

The most common problems include:

1. outdated information that does not reflect the individual's current status
2. mistaken inclusion of people with the same surname or similar data
3. incomplete or contradictory information about reasons for inclusion in the database
4. missing important identification data
5. incorrect or broken links to information sources

A correct and reliable profile in World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases should provide a comprehensive and accurate representation of information about the subject. Such a profile begins with precise identification data, including the full name with correct spelling, date and place of birth, as well as citizenship and residency. Equally important is current biographical information containing details about current residence, current positions, and places of employment. Only 2% of the examined profiles were found to have accurate biographies and links to detailed biographical publications.

Example: An individual has a name and surname common in their country. The profile lacks additional data that would allow for proper identification, such as date and place of birth, links to biographies, etc. A person unconnected to sanctions or criminal activities may face service denials or verification delays because they were mistakenly included in the high-risk category, having been confused with someone of the same name.

Key Research Findings

Our analysis of World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases has revealed a number of serious problems that call into question the reliability and effectiveness of these risk assessment tools.

Inaccuracies and errors in profiles can lead to serious consequences, including unjustified denial of financial services, reputational damage, and even legal problems for individuals mistakenly included in these databases or incorrectly described in them. Yet despite all these problems, they continue to be actively used.

The most serious database problems we identified include:

33% of profiles contain serious errors

One-third of profiles contain at least one serious error capable of negatively affecting compliance processes and leading to incorrect decisions and unjustified restrictions for data subjects. For example, errors in citizenship, full name, or date of birth.

24% of profiles are marked as meeting criteria for sanctions

One-quarter of profiles in the sample are marked as meeting criteria for sanctions. However, this marking has no legal basis: the status was invented by the databases themselves and is used to flag people who are not under sanctions.

6% of profiles have incorrectly listed business and political connections

Some profiles contain false or outdated information about unwanted connections. This can lead to false associations and unjustified elevation of risk assessments for innocent individuals.

3% of profiles contain fake biographical data

A number of profiles were found to contain false information in biographical records or completely fabricated biographies. Even such a small percentage calls into question the overall reliability of information in the databases and the quality of its verification.

8% of profiles may receive a negative status at any moment

Databases are updated manually, and no one knows which profiles will receive status updates during the next review.

Overall low level of data accuracy and reliability

Only 2% of profiles can be considered completely accurate and up-to-date. This means that 98% of profiles contain various errors, inaccuracies, or outdated data.

Selective and biased inclusion

Research showed a clear bias toward certain categories of individuals. Those at highest risk of database inclusion are top executives (64%) and businessmen (47%). Politicians (17%) and their relatives (13%) occupy fourth and fifth places respectively.

Conclusion

What can be done about all this?

During our research of World-Check and Dow Jones databases, we identified a number of problems affecting the reliability and currency of profiles. We found that:

• 33% of profiles contain serious errors
• 24% of profiles are marked as meeting criteria for sanctions, which does not always correspond to reality
• 6% of profiles have errors in listed connections
• 3% of profiles contain fake data
• 8% of profiles may receive a negative status at any moment
• 98% of profiles contain at least one error

Despite these alarming figures, it is important to note that some profiles could potentially be cleared of their negative status, as their data is outdated and does not reflect the current situation. All these aspects point to serious problems in the processes of data collection, verification, and updating in these databases.

Working with databases is one of the core areas of expertise at Orion Solutions. We specialize in analyzing profiles in World Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases, identifying errors and inaccuracies, and working to correct them.

As part of a study on the effectiveness of counterparty screening, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of profiles contained in the leading databases for KYC verification purposes: Thomson Reuters World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance.

To ensure that the research was representative, we created a random stratified sample of 150 profiles. The sampling period covered the first half of 2024, ensuring the data obtained was current.

Geographic distribution

• Europe
• Asia
• America
• Africa

Gender distribution

• Male
• Female

Age distribution

• 25-35
• 36-45
• 46-55
• 56+

Summary

World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance are information time bombs for millions of people worldwide. Being included in their lists means being branded as "unreliable." This can destroy your reputation overnight, derail your plans, and turn your life into an endless series of rejections and restrictions. What kind? Foreign banks will not open accounts for you and will freeze existing ones. Foreign governments will deny visas and residence permits. Business partners will terminate or refuse to start cooperation.

Many prefer to think that only those connected to financial crimes, terrorism, and corruption can end up in World-Check and Dow Jones. But this is not true. If you own or manage a large business, work or have worked in a state company, conduct or have conducted active public or political activities, your name is probably already on the World-Check and Dow Jones lists. Moreover, relatives, business partners, and close associates can also be labeled as "unreliable."

We conducted an extensive study and carefully examined records in the databases. The results are staggering. "Black marks" are often assigned based on unverified and sometimes blatantly false information haphazardly collected from across the internet. 98% of profiles contain inaccuracies and outdated information, while a third contain serious errors.

Despite the errors and imperfections, all banks and financial institutions without exception use World-Check and Dow Jones. And they are unlikely to stop doing so in the foreseeable future. Under these circumstances, you can and should work with your profile in these databases: at the very least, you should know what is written there.

Our research employed a comprehensive approach, including:

• quantitative analysis of statistical data
• qualitative assessment of profile content

It should be noted that our research has certain limitations related to sample size and time period. Nevertheless, the results demonstrate statistical significance and can be used to assess general trends in compliance control and risk management.

FAQ

1. What is World-Check and what is it used for?

World-Check is an international database designed to identify risks associated with individuals and legal entities. It is used by banks, financial organizations, and corporations to screen counterparties as part of compliance procedures (KYC, AML, and Due Diligence).

2. How do companies and financial organizations use World-Check and Dow Jones Risk & Compliance databases?

The databases are used to assess potential risks before establishing business relationships. Companies screen clients, partners, and investors for sanctions, financial crimes, corruption, political exposure (PEP), and other factors that could affect business security.

3. How can I find out if there is information about me in World-Check?

It is impossible to independently check for your profile in World-Check, as it does not provide open access to individuals. You can learn about the presence of information indirectly, for example, if a bank or other financial organization refuses service, citing internal compliance checks.

However, Orion Solutions can conduct an analysis to determine if your name appears in the database and help with further steps to correct data and protect your reputation.

4. What consequences can arise if my name appears in World-Check?

Inclusion in the database can lead to a denial of bank account openings, asset freezes, problems obtaining visas and residence permits, as well as reputational losses. Companies may refuse cooperation, even if the information in the profile is inaccurate or outdated.

5. Why does World-Check often contain errors and outdated data?

World-Check collects data from open sources (media, court decisions, sanctions lists, etc.) but does not always verify their currency. Many records are based on outdated articles or erroneous news reports, and the process of removing or correcting data is complex and opaque.

6. Can inaccurate information in World-Check be removed or corrected?

Yes, but doing so independently is extremely difficult. The process of correcting information in World-Check is opaque and requires legally substantiated arguments confirming errors in the profile.

Orion Solutions specializes in analyzing and correcting profiles in the World-Check database. We help gather necessary evidence, prepare requests for data changes, and interact with database owners to protect your reputation.

7. Which categories of individuals and organizations most often appear in World-Check?

Those at highest risk of inclusion are:

• politically exposed persons (PEPs) and their relatives
• executives of major companies
• business owners and managers
• individuals associated with offshore zones
• those mentioned in media in the context of legal proceedings, financial violations, or corruption

8. If I am not connected to crime, corruption, or sanctions, can I still end up in the database?

Yes. World-Check includes not only criminals but also people who may pose potential risk according to various criteria. For example, entrepreneurs working in countries with high corruption levels, or people whose namesakes are in the database, may end up on lists mistakenly.

9. What steps can be taken to minimize the risks associated with being included in World-Check?

The main way to minimize risks is to manage your digital footprint on the internet. Data for World-Check is collected primarily from open sources, so it is important to:

• monitor what is published about you in the media and social networks
• avoid participation in questionable business activities
• control how your name is mentioned in the context of business and political connections
• build transparency around your reputation and strengthen your positive information footprint

Orion Solutions helps clients not only build their Digital Profile but also develop strategies to reduce risks associated with inclusion in compliance databases.

10. Do World-Check and Dow Jones databases use official government information sources?

Partially. They analyze sanctions lists, company registries, court decisions, and government reports, but a significant portion of information comes from open sources such as the media and the internet, which makes the system vulnerable to misinformation and errors.