Back to blog
2026-05-12 · DueVestor team · 2 min read

Comparing OFAC SDN list providers: DueVestor vs Refinitiv World-Check

A side-by-side of the data sources, freshness model, and update cadence for sanctions screening — and why "more lists" is not the same as "better screening".

Sanctions-list providers love to advertise the raw count of lists they ingest. The number obscures a more useful question: are the four canonical lists fresh, complete, and cross-verified? Once you answer that, "1,400 vs 1,100 lists" stops mattering — which is why DueVestor counts its 22+ lists by official government and multilateral publishers ingested directly, not by aggregator catalog size.

The four canonical lists

DueVestor ingests all four FREE and direct from the canonical publisher. Each list is downloaded as XML/CSV, cached for 24 hours, parsed in-process, and token-matched against the subject with Levenshtein fuzzy. No paid intermediary.

Why cross-verification matters more than list count

A name hit on OFAC AND UN AND EU is HIGH confidence. The same name on OFAC only is MEDIUM. Single-source hits — especially adverse-media or PEP signals — are exactly where false positives explode. DueVestor exposes the confidence tier inline; cheaper providers lump everything into one binary "MATCH" column.

Refinitiv vs DueVestor

Refinitiv World-Check is a subscription product with opaque per-seat pricing. DueVestor is on-demand: $15 buys a full Type B EDD L3 (20–30 pages including the four canonical lists, GDELT adverse media, CourtListener litigation, and cross-source confidence scoring).