Country risk profile
DR Congo
Published by Salient One · Cite this profile
- ISO
- COD
- Region
- Africa
- Population
- 112.8M
- Profile
- updated 4 Nov 2026, 06:00 UTC
Composite risk
95/100
SevereAssessment summary
The published severe-risk rating is led by Governance and Environmental, based on 7 of 7 risk groups.
Non-commercial country composite. Not eligible for sale, licensing or commercial reports. Source-specific restrictions still apply; non-commercial labelling does not authorise CPI derivatives or resolve other source permissions. Source licences and attribution.
At-a-glance evidence
Risk ratings and primary indicators
Ratings apply published thresholds to each source value. Low means the observed value is below elevated-risk thresholds; an unrated group has insufficient evidence for a rating.
Primary source indicators
Full evidence and limitations ↓Governance
Severe18.4 / 100
Higher means stronger governance
Corruption perception
High20.0 / 100
Higher means cleaner public sector
Humanitarian risk
Severe8.0 / 10
Higher means greater crisis risk
Listed labour-risk goods
High7 goods
Listed country-good observations; absence does not establish low risk
Sanctions designations
Low105 recorded
Recorded designations, not unique subjects
Violent-event intensity
Moderate21 / 100
Higher means greater reported intensity
FATF status
LowNot listed
Published jurisdiction list status
State fragility
Severe107.2 / 120
Higher means greater fragility
Press freedom
Moderate42.2 / 100
Higher means greater press freedom
Environmental performance
High39.5 / 100
Higher means better performance
Published score inputs
What drives the score
01Governancesevere 3 / 3
- very low governance score (18.4/100, WB WGI 2025)
- very high INFORM risk (8/10, INFORM 2026)
02Environmentalsevere 3 / 3
- extreme climate vulnerability and very low adaptive readiness (ND-GAIN 24/100 2023)
- poor environmental performance (EPI 40/100, Yale 2024)
03Labour & Human Rightshigh 2 / 3
- high child labour rate (15% of children, ILO ILOSTAT 2020)
- child- or forced-labour evidence across 7 goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024)
Calculation and all contributing groups
Group total 13 ÷ 7 available groups. Base 61.9 → published 95/100.
- Governance
- severe · 3/3
- Corruption & Financial Crime
- high · 2/3
- Labour & Human Rights
- high · 2/3
- Conflict
- moderate · 1/3
- Sanctions
- low · 0/3
- Economic Fragility
- high · 2/3
- Environmental
- severe · 3/3
Published assessment rationale
Severe risk driven by Governance (severe — very low governance score (18.4/100, WB WGI 2025)), Environmental (severe — extreme climate vulnerability and very low adaptive readiness (ND-GAIN 24/100 2023)), Corruption & Financial Crime (high — high corruption perception (20/100, TI CPI 2025)), Labour & Human Rights (high — high child labour rate (15% of children, ILO ILOSTAT 2020)), Economic Fragility (high — OECD country risk category 6/7 — high risk (OECD CRC 2026)), and Conflict (moderate — elevated violent event intensity (21/100, 180-day GDELT CAMEO)).
Coverage measures available evidence, not certainty. See the exact formula and thresholds.
DR Congo narrative assessment
DR Congo carries a composite risk score of 95 out of 100 on the [S/1] scorecard, placing it in the severe risk band as of 4 November 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 18.4 out of 100 (2025, higher is better), a Transparency International CPI score of 20 out of 100 (2025, higher is cleaner) and an INFORM crisis-risk index of 8.0 out of 10 (2026, higher is worse). Exposure includes 105 sanctions or debarment designations linked to DR Congo within [S/1]'s 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available and 7 child-labour category observations and 5 forced-labour category observations across 7 source-listed goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024). The groups driving the assessment are governance, corruption & financial crime, labour & human rights, economic fragility and environmental. 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.
Continue the assessment
Apply the country context.
Project assessment uses this profile as regional context. Establish site-specific impacts through project and stakeholder evidence.
Country annex: free Word and PDF downloads after signing in.
Due diligence workflow · 1 of 3
Review the operating or sourcing context and source dates.
Country evidence provides context. Screening candidates need identity review. Record the final assessment and follow-up in the RBC review.
Continue to sanctions →Indicator evidenceSource values, publication years and links
Published values retain their original units and scale directions. Open each source before using an indicator in a decision.
CHILD / FORCED LABOUR · US DOL
7 GOODSHigh
Cobalt Ore (heterogenite), Copper Ore, Diamonds, Gold, Tantalum Ore (coltan) +2 more
Child-labour category 7 · Forced-labour category 5
SOURCE: US DOL TVPRA · 2024 · link ↗
SANCTIONS · 18 CONFIGURED SOURCES
105 DESIGNATIONSLow
Selected lists: EU 54 · OFAC 0 · UN 41 · UK 0 · SECO 0
A country-level count is a screening signal, not a finding about any specific entity or evidence of national culpability.
Screen a named counterparty ▸List and entity-type coverage ▸
VIOLENT EVENTS · GDELT
21/100 INTENSITYModerate
180-day CAMEO violent event intensity (normalized 0-100)
SOURCE: GDELT · queried 04/11/2026 · link ↗
FATF STATUS
NOT LISTED Low
Not in the FATF list — not subject to FATF monitoring or call for action
SOURCE: FATF · link ↗
FRAGILE STATES INDEX
107.2/120Severe
Fund for Peace — higher = more fragile
SOURCE: Fragile States Index · 2023 · link ↗
PRESS FREEDOM · RSF
42.2/100Moderate
Reporters Without Borders — higher = more free
SOURCE: RSF Press Freedom · 2026 · link ↗
ENV. PERFORMANCE · YALE EPI
39.5/100High
Yale Environmental Performance Index — higher = better
SOURCE: Yale EPI · 2024 · link ↗
CLIMATE RISK · ND-GAIN
24/100Severe
Notre Dame Global Adaptation Index — higher = better adapted (vuln. 71%, ready 23%)
SOURCE: ND-GAIN · 2023 · link ↗
TREATY RATIFICATION · ILO NORMLEX
8/8
Context only: legacy eight-convention ratification aggregate. C155 and C187 are excluded; ratification does not establish enforcement or project practice.
SOURCE: ILO NORMLEX · 2026 · link ↗
CHILD LABOUR · ILO ILOSTAT
15%High
Children aged 5–17 in child labour — ILO survey estimate
SOURCE: ILO ILOSTAT · 2020 · link ↗
POLITICAL FREEDOM · FREEDOM HOUSE
Data not available
Source last ingested: —
Additional inputs
- War events · 180-day GDELT
- 7.6/100 intensity2026-11-04 · Source ↗
- OECD country risk category
- 6/72026 · Source ↗
- IMF programme severity
- 3/42026 · Source ↗
- Trade circumvention signal
- No country observation
- EU forced-labour product groups
- No country observation
- PM2.5 annual mean
- 35.81 μg/m³2023 · Source ↗
- Water stress
- No country observation
- Land degradation
- No country observation
- Human development · context only
- 52/1002023 · Source ↗
Source dates and coverageIngestion and publication context
Observation periods, recorded pipeline dates and fallback status are distinct. A recent pipeline date does not verify the observation or establish complete coverage.
Scorecard computed4 Nov 2026, 06:00 UTC
- Governance · WB WGI
- Observation period: 2025
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:04 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Corruption · TI CPI
- Observation period: 2025
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:01 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - INFORM Risk · JRC
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:07 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Child / forced labour · US DOL
- Observation period: 2024
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:07 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Sanctions · aggregate ingestion marker
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 4 Nov 2026, 03:00 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Violent events · GDELT
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 4 Nov 2026, 04:36 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - FATF
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:00 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Fragile States Index
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:08 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Press freedom · RSF
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:08 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Environmental performance · Yale
- Observation period: 2024
Pipeline date: 1 Sept 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Climate risk · ND-GAIN
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Labour rights · ILO NORMLEX
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Legacy eight-convention aggregate; individual convention provenance requires validation. - Child labour · ILOSTAT
- Observation period: 2020
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:06 UTC
Survey provenance requires validation before project-assessment use. - Political freedom · Freedom House
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: Not recorded
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Country risk category · OECD
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Lending programmes · IMF
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Trade patterns · UN Comtrade
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 3 Oct 2026, 02:01 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Human development · UNDP
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:13 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Forced labour · EU
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: Not recorded
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Air quality
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Nov 2026, 04:13 UTC
World Bank WDI / GBD observation; no static fallback in the corrected ingestor. - Water and land · ingestion paused
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:12 UTC
Historical fallback observations are unverified. UN SDG ingestion is paused pending reuse-term verification.
Sector exposureCountry × sector and commodity signals
Sector Risk Intelligence
Child labour by sector · Conflict minerals · EUDR commodity risk · Forced labour detentions
Published model changes · 12 months
Recent score changes
Loading material changes…
These entries record changes in published model outputs. Review the source dates and evidence before relying on a change.
Research and reuseSources, methods and related evidence
Common questions about DR Congo risk
What is the overall risk level of DR Congo?
DR Congo scores 95 out of 100 on the [S/1] composite risk scorecard, which places it in the severe risk band as of 4 November 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.
Is DR Congo on the FATF grey list?
No. DR Congo does not appear on the FATF grey list or black list in the current FATF data [S/1] holds as of 4 November 2026. FATF updates its lists three times per year, so check the current FATF statement before relying on this.
How many sanctions designations are linked to DR Congo?
[S/1] records 105 sanctions or debarment designations linked to DR Congo within its 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available as of 4 November 2026. These include 54 on the EU consolidated list and 41 on the UN Security Council list. Source availability varies and is published separately. A country-level count is a screening signal, not a finding about any specific entity.
What is DR Congo's corruption score?
DR Congo scores 20 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.
Are goods from DR Congo linked to child or forced labour?
The US Department of Labor's TVPRA list (2024 edition) records 7 child-labour category observations and 5 forced-labour category observations across 7 source-listed goods from DR Congo: Cobalt Ore (heterogenite), Copper Ore, Diamonds, Gold, Tantalum Ore (coltan), Tin Ore (cassiterite), Tungsten Ore (wolframite). 7 of the 7 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.
How well governed is DR Congo?
DR Congo scores 18.4 out of 100 on the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators for 2025, 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.
Is there active conflict in DR Congo?
[S/1] records a normalised conflict-event intensity of 20.6 out of 100 for DR Congo, 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.
Where does the DR Congo risk data come from?
The DR Congo 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, 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 4 November 2026.
From context to decision
What should happen after a country-risk signal?
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.
Cite and reuse this profile
Non-commercial country composite. Not eligible for sale, licensing or commercial reports. Source-specific restrictions still apply; non-commercial labelling does not authorise CPI derivatives or resolve other source permissions. Keep the source date and country-level limitations alongside the evidence.
Salient One (2026-11-04). DR Congo Country Risk Profile. https://salientone.eu/s1/scorecard/dr-congo. Country-level context; not an entity determination.
Salient One publishes the profile and its interpretation. Credit the underlying indicator publishers when using their data and retain their applicable terms. See our attribution guidance, reuse terms and corrections process.