Compare
OFAC search vs an integrated screening API
Direct OFAC access is necessary, but a reusable screening API is what turns sanctions data into repeatable search, export, and monitoring work.
Best for
For teams evaluating whether direct source access is enough.
What official source access gives you
Official access is the baseline. It proves the data is real and current.
- Direct authority source
- Useful for manual verification
- Good for one-off checks
What an integrated API adds
An integrated layer compresses multiple manual steps into one reusable path.
- Faster search surface
- Reusable export shapes
- Same key across related public-data products
Feature comparison
| Feature | OFAC Direct | opendata API |
|---|---|---|
| Sanctions search | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Multi-list screening (OFAC + UN + EU + UK) | — | ✓ Yes |
| Company registry cross-check | — | ✓ Yes |
| CSV/JSON export | — | ✓ Yes |
| API automation | — | ✓ Yes |
| Monitoring alerts | — | Pro |
| Cost | Free | $0–199/mo |
The question is not access. The question is repeatability.
Official sources remain the authority. The product layer earns its keep by shortening the path from signal to export, saved search, monitoring, and repeatable delivery.
Run a free sanctions check
Test the restricted-party workflow before deciding whether integrated screening is necessary.
Read the pre-payment verification guide
See how sanctions checks fit into a broader company verification workflow.
See plan and monitoring options
Review when free checks should move into exports or recurring alerts.