OpenSanctions vs OFSI consolidated list: which to use?

Question

Accepted Answer

Use both — they answer different questions.

**OFSI** publishes the UK's authoritative consolidated sanctions list. If a person or entity is on the OFSI list, transacting with them is illegal under UK sanctions law. The list is small (~3,000-5,000 entries), maintained directly by HM Treasury, refreshed daily, and the source-of-truth for UK enforcement. For sanctions compliance under MLR-2017, screening against OFSI is non-negotiable.

**OpenSanctions** is an aggregated catalogue with 200+ source datasets covering: sanctions lists from 30+ jurisdictions (UK OFSI, US OFAC, EU, UN, plus Switzerland SECO, Canada OSFI, Australia DFAT, and many more), the FATF politically-exposed-persons (PEPs) catalogue with ~2 million entries, an adverse-media collection sourced from court records + regulator publications + news, and known-criminal entity lists. OpenSanctions sources are CC-BY-NC for development use; the commercial Match API is licensed at €0.10 per query.

Which to use:

- **For UK sanctions compliance**: OFSI is mandatory. Pair with UN + EU lists for cross-jurisdiction coverage (the UK still has some treaty obligations).
- **For PEP screening under MLR-2017 EDD**: OpenSanctions PEP catalogue is the de-facto standard. The OFSI list doesn't cover PEPs.
- **For adverse-media checks (LSAG-2025 expectation)**: OpenSanctions adverse-media collection is the easiest single source.
- **For multi-jurisdiction screening (US OFAC, EU, etc)**: OpenSanctions covers all of them in one query.

The Stratum sanctions-screening endpoint runs all of these in one call: OFSI + UN + EU consolidated lists from the authoritative sources, plus the OpenSanctions PEP + adverse-media catalogues. Each match carries its source provenance.

OpenSanctions vs OFSI consolidated list: which to use?

Related