01S1-derived signal
Country context
Use governance, conflict, corruption, sanctions and economic indicators to route the depth of review—not to decide whether a company is acceptable.
Open the Ukraine scorecard →LOADING SCORECARD…
UKR · Europe · pop. 32.9M · generated 25 Aug 2026, 06:04 UTC
COMPOSITE RISK
Severe risk driven by Conflict (severe — very high violent event intensity (64/100, 180-day GDELT CAMEO)), Economic Fragility (severe — OECD country risk category 7/7 — highest risk (OECD CRC 2026)), Governance (high — high INFORM risk (5.6/10, INFORM 2026)), Corruption & Financial Crime (moderate — elevated corruption perception (36/100, TI CPI 2025)), Labour & Human Rights (moderate — child- or forced-labour evidence across 3 goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024)), Sanctions (moderate — notable sanctions exposure (1269 designations, 39/M pop.)), and Environmental (moderate — below-average environmental performance (EPI 55/100, Yale 2024)).
Evidence coverage · complete
The engine sums the available group scores (12), divides by 7, and calibrates the resulting 0–100 base score using the published method. Base 57.1 → published 88/100.
Coverage describes available country-level evidence, not confidence in any entity-level decision. See the exact formula and thresholds.
Ukraine carries a composite risk score of 88 out of 100 on the [S/1] scorecard, placing it in the severe risk band as of 25 August 2026. The result is based on 7 of 7 indicator groups (complete evidence coverage); unavailable groups are excluded rather than treated as low risk. It records a World Bank governance score of 40.6 out of 100 (2024, higher is better), a Transparency International CPI score of 36 out of 100 (2025, higher is cleaner) and an INFORM crisis-risk index of 5.6 out of 10 (2026, higher is worse). Exposure includes 1,269 sanctions or debarment designations linked to Ukraine within [S/1]'s 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available and 3 child-labour category observations across 3 source-listed goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024). The groups driving the assessment are governance, conflict and economic fragility. All figures are drawn from official open-data sources and carry their own publication year. This is a country-level screening input, not an entity-level determination.
CHILD / FORCED LABOUR · US DOL
3 GOODSmoderate
Amber, Coal, Pornography
Child-labour category 3 · Forced-labour category 0
SOURCE: US DOL TVPRA · 2024 · link ↗
SANCTIONS · EU/OFAC/UN/UK/SECO
1269 DESIGNATIONSmoderate
EU 189 · OFAC 213 · UN 0 · UK 108 · SECO 30
VIOLENT EVENTS · GDELT
64/100 INTENSITYsevere
90-day CAMEO violent event intensity (normalized 0-100)
SOURCE: GDELT · queried 25/08/2026 · link ↗
FATF STATUS
NOT LISTED
Not in the FATF list — not subject to FATF monitoring or call for action
SOURCE: FATF · link ↗
FRAGILE STATES INDEX
95.9/120high
Fund for Peace — higher = more fragile
SOURCE: Fragile States Index · 2023 · link ↗
PRESS FREEDOM · RSF
66.1/100
Reporters Without Borders — higher = more free
SOURCE: RSF Press Freedom · 2026 · link ↗
ENV. PERFORMANCE · YALE EPI
54.6/100moderate
Yale Environmental Performance Index — higher = better
SOURCE: Yale EPI · 2024 · link ↗
CLIMATE RISK · ND-GAIN
47/100moderate
Notre Dame Global Adaptation Index — higher = better adapted (vuln. 39%, ready 36%)
SOURCE: ND-GAIN · 2023 · link ↗
LABOUR RIGHTS · ILO NORMLEX
8/8
ILO fundamental conventions ratified — higher = stronger labour protections
SOURCE: ILO NORMLEX · 2026 · link ↗
CHILD LABOUR · ILO ILOSTAT
2%
Children aged 5–17 in child labour — ILO survey estimate
SOURCE: ILO ILOSTAT · 2021 · link ↗
POLITICAL FREEDOM · FREEDOM HOUSE
Data not available
Last fetch attempt: —
Sector Risk Intelligence
Child labour by sector · Conflict minerals · EUDR commodity risk · Forced labour detentions
Ukraine evidence pathway · public evidence to verification
S1 establishes country, sector, commodity and public-list signals. Salient One publishes the method and its limits. Ukraine 1 resolves what the public record cannot establish.
Current Ukraine source slice (2024): 3 child-labour category observations and 0 forced-labour category observations across 3 goods. 2 of 3 goods currently map to the shared sector taxonomy. Unmapped and retained rather than guessed: Pornography.
Use governance, conflict, corruption, sanctions and economic indicators to route the depth of review—not to decide whether a company is acceptable.
Open the Ukraine scorecard →Inspect source-listed goods separately from the sectors S1 can map conservatively. An unmapped good remains visible instead of being forced into a category.
Inspect the Ukraine slice →Search names and variants across public restriction sources, then resolve every material candidate against identifiers, ownership and the issuing authority.
Run a public-list signal check →Move through legal identity, ownership and control, procurement, litigation, distress and present operating capacity in a reproducible sequence.
Use the Ukraine evidence hub →Check whether the official evidence entry points respond now. Technical access does not establish completeness, freshness, legal availability or reuse rights.
Review the access monitor →Escalate when public evidence cannot settle identity, actual control, relationships or operating capacity and the decision requires Ukrainian-language or on-the-ground verification.
Open Ukraine 1 →These layers route due diligence. They do not determine the legality, reliability or suitability of a specific company, product, shipment, transaction or relationship.
Ukraine scores 88 out of 100 on the [S/1] composite risk scorecard, which places it in the severe risk band as of 25 August 2026. The result uses 7 of seven indicator groups and has complete evidence coverage; The composite uses the available scores across seven indicator groups: governance, corruption and financial crime, labour and human rights, conflict, sanctions, economic fragility, and environmental. Groups score 0–3; the available-group average is converted to a base percentage and calibrated using the formula published on the methodology page.
No. Ukraine does not appear on the FATF grey list or black list in the current FATF data [S/1] holds as of 25 August 2026. FATF updates its lists three times per year, so check the current FATF statement before relying on this.
[S/1] records 1,269 sanctions or debarment designations linked to Ukraine within its 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available as of 25 August 2026. These include 213 on the US OFAC SDN list, 189 on the EU consolidated list and 108 on the UK FCDO list. Source availability varies and is published separately. A country-level count is a screening signal, not a finding about any specific entity.
Ukraine scores 36 out of 100 on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index for 2025. The CPI runs from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean) and measures perceived public-sector corruption based on expert assessments and business surveys.
The US Department of Labor's TVPRA list (2024 edition) records 3 child-labour category observations across 3 source-listed goods from Ukraine: Amber, Coal, Pornography. This source release contains no forced-labour-category observation for the country. 2 of the 3 goods currently map conservatively to the shared S1 sector taxonomy; unmapped goods are retained rather than assigned by guesswork. This is a country-and-good screening signal, not a finding about any specific supplier, product or shipment.
Ukraine scores 40.6 out of 100 on the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators for 2024, where a higher score is better. The WGI aggregate combines Voice and Accountability, Political Stability, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption.
[S/1] records a normalised conflict-event intensity of 63.9 out of 100 for Ukraine, derived from CAMEO-coded violent event data in GDELT. This measures the volume and severity of reported events over a rolling window; it reflects what has been reported in media, not a verified operational assessment.
The Ukraine scorecard aggregates official open-data sources including the World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators, Transparency International CPI, the European Commission JRC INFORM index, US DOL TVPRA, FATF, the Fragile States Index, RSF, Freedom House, ILO NORMLEX and GDELT, together with an 18-source configured sanctions and debarment coverage model including OFAC, the EU consolidated list, UK FCDO and the UN Security Council. Each indicator carries its own publication year, shown on the page, and current pipeline health is published in the source directory. The scorecard was last generated on 25 August 2026.
From context to decision
Country indicators should route diligence, not decide whether a specific supplier is acceptable. Add sector exposure, resolve the legal entity, reconstruct ownership and control, screen connected parties, and verify the facts that matter to the transaction.
Compare nearby jurisdictions in the same regional evidence context.
[S/1] SCORECARD aggregates publicly available country risk indicators from official sources. It supports geopolitical risk scoring but does not constitute a final risk decision and is not a substitute for entity-level assessment. Verify outputs manually.
Methodology and data sources · Browse all country risk profiles
Need a deeper, human-verified investigation?
Salient One combines source-cited data, network analysis and human judgement. Its human-led investigation layer supports complex decisions in conflict-affected, fragile, and high-risk jurisdictions.
Open Ukraine 1 ▸