Ripjar has published ‘The State of Adverse Media Screening 2026’. This examines how financial institutions rate the importance of adverse media screening in risk management. The report is based on a survey of recipients across the UK, US, French and German markets.
Adverse media screening is recognised by 93% as critical to risk frameworks. However, only 77% of institutions surveyed conduct it, and 58% still rely on manual internet searches. In the US, 70% rely on manual searches, above the other nations.
These percentages are surprising in a landscape where financial penalties rose by 522% against banks alone to $3.65 bn. The report finds that the pulse of the industry is not very strong, despite solutions such as Ripjar existing. The good news is that 90% of firms plan to increase investment over the next 12 months.
The report is 26 pages long and consists of five sections. The content within these sections contains commentary and data visualisation. There is a lot of space used up with the data visualisations, which could have been condensed. There is no qualitative element to the survey beyond the executive summary. With no quotes from business leaders to Ripjar executives.
The five sections drill down into the findings of the report:
- The state of play
- How firms are screening today
- The unified platform consensus
- Investment is coming
- Closing the gap
Unusually, there are two appendices beyond the conclusion that are worth reading, as they provide the main takeaways for the readers. The first consists of 5 tips that detail how organisations can build adverse media screening into their risk framework. The second is an FAQ, providing answers to some of the questions that readers might raise when reading the report.
Beyond that, a final section provides information about Ripjar, how readers can book a screening, diagnostics and how it has helped other organisations.
What is in the report
The report does not look at the amount that organisations will invest. It does consider the driving forces behind those investments:
- Strategic AI adoption (79%)
- Regulatory Forces (77%)
- Reputational Risk (74%)
- Cost reduction and Efficiency (74%)
While 58% of vendors are still using manual searches, there are glimmers of maturity:
- 81% use an integrated platform
- 74% have an automated vendor
- 72% use real-time feeds
There are clearly gaps, and yet leaders know what they want. 96% of leaders want adverse media screening combined with sanctions, PEPs and watchlists in a single unified platform. The report calls out 4 gaps that they need to bridge:
- The manual search gap
- The frequency gap
- The fragmentation gap
- The AI readiness gap
Organisations need to close these gaps, and the report concludes by noting that organisations need to act. They have the investment, the solutions are available, and they need to prioritise and implement. The risk, as banks invest in AI solutions to deliver better products, is that they risk bigger losses from fraud and fines.
Matt Mills, Chief Executive Officer at Ripjar, commented, “There’s a clear direction of travel in financial institutions when it comes to adverse media. With so many decision-makers viewing it as critical, adverse media screening is the first line of defence against crime and reputation risk.
“But what the research also reveals is that there are big differences across countries, and many are unprepared to run it in the way today’s market demands: systematically and at scale. Some of the best banks in the world are already doing this, but it’s clear that the rest of the market needs to unify adverse media with sanctions, watchlists and PEPs screening if financial institutions are to adapt successfully to the new risk landscape.”
Enterprise Times: What does this mean
Ripjar has produced a report that has a very narrow focus and delivers useful insights and help for organisations that need to improve adverse media screening. It sets the background, explains the current state of affairs and how organisations are looking to improve.
The report could have been improved with some of the FAQ spread throughout the paper. With perhaps tips and questions posed to the reader about their situation. Moreover, it might also have provided a tip for business leaders to make the case for investment budget in adverse Media Screening against other priorities in the business.
