FATF Mutual Evaluation Results: 2024 Statistics, Trends, and Analysis

Methodology

The figures here draw from three primary FATF sources: the Annual Report 2023-2024, the Report on the State of Effectiveness and Compliance with the FATF Standards (2022), and the Consolidated Assessment Ratings database, updated December 2025. Together they cover both the technical compliance dimension (whether the necessary laws and regulations exist) and the effectiveness dimension (whether AML/CFT systems produce real-world outcomes).

Technical compliance is rated on a four-point scale: Compliant (C), Largely Compliant (LC), Partially Compliant (PC), and Non-Compliant (NC). Effectiveness is assessed across 11 Immediate Outcomes at four levels: High, Substantial, Moderate, and Low. Ratings are assigned by independent assessment teams, not self-reported by the countries under review.

The fourth round covered 200+ jurisdictions across the FATF Global Network, with the final mutual evaluation reports for Argentina and Oman adopted at the October 2024 plenary. Individual country ratings include any follow-up re-ratings applied after the initial evaluation report. The fifth round commenced in 2024 under FATF's revised 2022 methodology, which places greater weight on outcomes rather than legislative frameworks alone.

Technical compliance and effectiveness ratings are distinct measures. A country can score 40/40 on technical compliance while still performing poorly on effectiveness if laws aren't enforced and outcomes aren't achieved.

Full data table

Sources: FATF Consolidated Assessment Ratings (December 2025 update); FATF Annual Report 2023-2024; FATF Report on the State of Effectiveness and Compliance (2022); FATF Plenary Outcomes June and October 2024.

Key findings

Technical compliance has more than doubled since 2012, from 36% to 76%. That's a real gain across 206 jurisdictions and reflects the sustained pressure of FATF's evaluation and follow-up cycle. Countries that once had no AML legislation now have frameworks on the books. The fourth round, completed in October 2024, covered more than 200 members. Source: FATF Annual Report 2023-2024.

Effectiveness is the persistent gap. Only 19% of 120 assessed states achieved high or substantial effectiveness specifically in confiscating the proceeds of crime. Laws exist; enforcement doesn't follow. That's the central finding from the most rigorous analysis FATF has published on this. Source: FATF Report on the State of Effectiveness and Compliance, 2022.

Supervisors are the weak link, especially outside the formal financial sector. Only 17% of financial institution supervisors are effectively implementing a risk-based approach. For designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs), that figure falls to 3%. These aren't self-reported numbers; they come from on-site assessments. Source: FATF State of Effectiveness Report, 2022.

The grey list shifted materially in 2024. June brought the exits of Jamaica and Türkiye after remediation. October added Algeria, Angola, Ivory Coast, and Lebanon while removing Senegal. FATF also announced updated grey-listing criteria that prioritize high-income countries and financial centres over USD 10 billion, removing some protection that smaller economies previously had. Source: FATF Plenary Outcomes, June and October 2024.

The fifth evaluation round launched in 2024 with a harder test. FATF's revised 2022 methodology requires larger case-review samples and more scrutiny of real outcomes. Countries that sailed through the fourth round on legislative compliance alone should expect lower ratings this time if enforcement records don't match their statute books. Source: FATF Annual Report 2023-2024.

Year-over-year trends

The jump from 36% to 76% technical compliance between 2012 and 2024 represents the clearest measurable success of the FATF process. Most of that gain came in the middle years of the fourth round, as jurisdictions enacted AML/CFT legislation to avoid grey or black listing. By the time the fourth round closed in 2024, countries were arriving with laws ready.

What hasn't tracked proportionally is effectiveness. The 2022 State of Effectiveness report established a hard baseline: a large majority of countries can point to statutes; far fewer can demonstrate those statutes are stopping financial crime. FATF has consistently described this as the primary challenge for the fifth round.

Grey list composition is volatile from year to year. After peaking in recent years, FATF introduced risk-based prioritization criteria in October 2024. High-income countries and major financial centres (over USD 10 billion in assets) are now prioritized for listing when deficiencies are found. The poorest economies on the UN's least-developed countries list are deprioritized except where risk is acute. That's a deliberate policy shift, not a data artifact.

The US fourth-round follow-up report (2024) illustrates the spread typical of developed economies: 9 Compliant, 23 Largely Compliant, 5 Partially Compliant, and 3 Non-Compliant across the 40 Recommendations. A largely compliant score dominates even for major financial centres. This pattern holds broadly across G20 members, where legislative frameworks are strong but certain gap areas (beneficial ownership transparency, DNFBP supervision) pull ratings down.

The fifth round will produce new data through 2025-2028. Given the methodology shift toward effectiveness, aggregate compliance percentages are likely to show more variation across jurisdictions than the fourth round did.

What this means for compliance teams

The data tells a specific story: countries are passing laws faster than they're enforcing them. For compliance officers and MLROs with cross-border exposure, that creates a practical problem that no amount of policy documentation solves. A correspondent bank domiciled in a jurisdiction with technically high ratings can still be running a broken AML programme.

The 17% figure for financial supervisors implementing effective risk-based approaches should recalibrate expectations. When your institution is conducting customer due diligence on a counterpart from a jurisdiction in the 83%, "they're in a compliant country" is not sufficient justification. Enhanced due diligence needs to account for the gap between legislative compliance and supervisory effectiveness.

Grey list membership triggers direct obligations. Under FATF Recommendation 1's risk-based approach, institutions are required to apply heightened scrutiny to transactions involving grey-listed jurisdictions. The October 2024 additions of Algeria, Angola, Ivory Coast, and Lebanon mean four new countries now require systematic enhanced due diligence in correspondent relationships, trade finance, and customer onboarding. FATF cited a lack of effective risk-based supervision, insufficient beneficial ownership transparency, and inadequate ML/TF investigations and prosecutions in each case. Your transaction monitoring rules and thresholds for these jurisdictions should be reviewed against those specific deficiencies.

The fifth round's sharper focus on effectiveness changes what regulators will look for in institution-level audits. "We have a policy" will satisfy fewer examiners trained under the 2022 methodology. Documented decisions, outcome tracking, and evidence of real-world impact are what the new framework rewards. Regulatory compliance automation that produces auditable records of how and why decisions were made is closer to mandatory than optional under this environment.

For institutions managing PEP and beneficial ownership exposure in the newly grey-listed jurisdictions, FATF Recommendation 12 on PEPs is now operationally active in four more countries. Each of the October 2024 additions was cited for deficient beneficial ownership transparency. That means the PEP screening and ownership resolution burden on your institution increases directly, since you can't rely on the jurisdiction's own registers to fill the gaps.

Sources

• FATF, "Annual Report 2023-2024," 2024
• FATF, "Report on the State of Effectiveness and Compliance with the FATF Standards," 2022
• FATF, "Consolidated Assessment Ratings (2014-2026 assessments)," updated December 2025
• FATF, "Outcomes FATF Plenary, 23-25 October 2024"
• FATF, "Outcomes FATF Plenary, 26-28 June 2024"
• US Department of the Treasury, "FATF Completes Fourth Round of Mutual Evaluations," press release JY2678, 2024
• FATF, "Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring, 25 October 2024"