Blog
BankTrack news
BankTrack blog
Partner news
Partner blog
Bank
Deutsche BankGermany
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 11:45:58
Deutsche Bank's head office in Frankfurt am Main. Photo: Raimond Spekking via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 11:45:58
Bank info
BankTrack campaigns
All
About
| Website | http://www.db.com |
| Headquarters |
Taunusanlage 12
60325 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
|
| CEO/chair |
Christian Sewing CEO |
| Supervisors | |
| Ownership |
listed on Frankfurt Stock Exchange & NYSE
Deutsche Bank's shareholder structure can be accessed here. |
Deutsche Bank is a German global investment bank that was founded in 1870. The Bank operates throughout the world and has a large presence in Germany and Europe, but is also active in North America, Asia and in emerging markets. Deutsche Bank offers a variety of financial services. Its key activities include corporate banking, private banking and asset management.
Sustainability
Commitments
Policies
Voluntary standards
Deutsche Bank's most important sustainability commitments can be found at the website sections listed below.
Deutsche Bank has committed itself to the following voluntary standards:
Dodgy Deals
Deutsche Bank is linked to a number of companies and projects that BankTrack considers controversial (so called Dodgy Deals), e.g. as a current or past financier or through an expression of interest. The profiles below provide more details on the nature of Deutsche Bank's link to these deals.
Projects / Companies
Finance type
Year
News
BankTrack
Partners
Blog
External
Resources
Documents
Videos
Links
Video links
http://www.swr.de/mediathek/-/did=6481194/pv=video/yegcxj/
Documentary about Deutsche Bank and its involvement in cluster munition producers (Textron e.g.). In German.
Accountability
Grievances
Response
tracking
Deutsche Bank launched a grievance mechanism which is open to anyone, including to people potentially affected by its finance. Complaints can be lodged via email at report.misconduct@db.com or by a telephone hotline.
Stakeholders may also raise complaints via the OECD National Contact Points (see OECD Watch guidance).
Deutsche Bank is an Equator Principles signatory. While the Equator Principles have no official grievance mechanism, complaints relating to this bank's financing of Equator Principles projects can be filed through our own website www.equator-complaints.org.
This page evaluates Deutsche Bank's responses to instances of alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, raised by civil society organisations. It is not intended to be exhaustive, but covers selected impacts raised by BankTrack and other civil society partners since 2016. For the full scoring methodology, see here. For more information about BankTrack's evaluation of bank responses to human rights impacts, see the 2021 report "Actions speak louder: assessing bank responses to human rights violations".
Impacts reviewed
Responded?
Total score
Response
Action
Monitoring
Deforestation in the Amazon (July 2019)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not respond. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Don't Buy into Occupation report (November 2022)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not respond. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information to indicate the bank is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
Don't Buy into Occupation report (September 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not respond. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress.
Following the bank's response: The bank has not provided details on how it monitored the progress of specific companies or how the bank monitored the impact on rights-holders involved in raising the issue with the bank of its own action of updating the Agriculture sector policy. Therefore, the score remains unchanged.
More info
Banks and Dirty Diesel: Vitol and Trafigura (May 2017)
1
0.5
0.5
0
Response
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded but did not acknowledge its link to the impact due to client confidentiality. The response did comment on the issues raised, stating that it had "discussed the topic that you address with your briefing with the companies". Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank stated that it has "discussed the topic that you address with your briefing with the companies...both companies assured us of their awareness of the seriousness of that issue raised". However, the bank did not detail whether it required the companies to take specific actions nor whether the bank itself took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Banks profiting from the construction and hotel boom in Qatar (November 2022)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly denying the allegation and citing client confidentiality. The allegation raised is based on research showing a financial link (in loans, underwriting and/or shareholdings) between the bank and specific companies with operations in the construction and hospitality sectors in Qatar. The bank denies financing those sectors in Qatar directly, but its response does not address its indirect financial links to the impacts raised (i.e. corporate finance to the companies mentioned). Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client(s) or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information to indicate the bank is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
East African Crude Oil Pipeline (March 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded stating that it "cannot comment on any existing or potential client relationships”.
Following media reporting: In May 2022, Reuters reported that the bank ruled out financing for the project; however, the bank did not put out a public statement so it does not receive a score.
Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not provide information on whether it engaged with its client or took appropriate action.
Following media reporting: No change in score.
Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored measures taken by its client to address the impacts associated with the project. Finance for JBS and links to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon (March 2023)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded citing client confidentiality saying that it "cannot comment on potential, existing or former client relationships". While the bank explains it requires "clients to participate in certification schemes and expect them to publicly demonstrate their commitment to No Deforestation standards", it does not acknowledge a link to the company or impacts, but rejects the allegations. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
IOI Corporation labour standards violations (February 2016)
0.5
0.5
0
0
Response
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded acknowledging the link to the company, however it does not comment on or respond to the substance of the issues raised. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank confirmed that it engaged with the client regarding "certain sustainability topics", but this is not enough to determine that it has engaged regarding the specific impacts raised. As such this is not sufficient for a half score. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Myanmar: Equity exposure to companies linked to the military regime (October 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly to the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, but it fell short of acknowledging a link to the impacts and it did not respond to the substance of the issues raised. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or investee companies or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available about whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Rio Tinto's Jadar mine, Serbia (December 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank's response neither acknowledges its link to the impact, nor addresses the issues raised Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank does not describe any engagement with its client or approptriate action Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information to indicate the bank is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
JSW Utkal steel and coal, India (February 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded, stating that they "cannot comment on any existing or potential client relationships." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
Impacts of Indonesia’s state electricity company PLN (March 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank replied, stating: "we cannot comment on any existing or potential client relationships," and "State-owned enterprises in Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) countries will be allowed to have trajectories for the phaseout from thermal coal business that are aligned with the country’s commitments under the JETP program." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
See the letter BankTrack sent the bank here.
Average
75%
0.13
0.08
0.04
0
Banks and Climate
Banks and Climate
The 2025 Banking on Climate Chaos report showed that Deutsche Bank provided $49.5 bn in financing to the fossil fuel industry between 2021 and 2024. In 2024 only, Deutsche Bank provided $14.3 bn, including $8.4 bn for oil, gas and coal companies expanding fossil fuels. Find further details on Deutsche Bank's fossil fuel portfolio and how it compares to other large banks globally on the Banking on Climate Chaos website below.
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance tracks the coal, oil and gas policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool (CPT) and the Oil and Gas Policy Tracker (OGPT). BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of Deutsche Bank’s fossil fuel policy below.
False Solutions Tracker expansion
BankLast update
Country
Wind Energy
Solar Energy
Geothermal Energy
Ocean Energy
Energy grids and storage
Hydropower
Hydrogen
Solid Biomass
Biofuels
CCUS
Nuclear Power
Details
Explanation
The purpose of the False Solutions Tracker is to give a clear overview of energy technologies that fall under banks' individual sustainable finance commitments. The tracker lists 11 energy technologies that are usually associated with the energy transition and the decarbonisation of the economy. These technologies are defined here and classified in three categories:
-
Real solutions: Technologies that deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy. BankTrack considers these technologies as real solutions only if and when they do deliver Energy Democracy.
-
Solutions under strict conditions: Energy technologies that could be real solutions if they deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy but that could also be false solutions. This is the case of hydrogen and hydropower. On one hand, fossil-free and green hydrogen could be a real solution under certain conditions. However, fossil-based hydrogen and nuclear hydrogen are always false solutions. On the other hand, hydropower lifespan extension could also be a real solution under strict conditions while hydropower expansion is a false solution.
-
False solutions: Energy technologies that are not aligned with a just transition towards Energy Democracy.
For each one of the 11 energy technologies, the tracker indicates if it is included in bank's individual sustainable finance commitments:
For Real solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For solutions under strict conditions and for false solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For more details see this page.
Banks and Human Rights
Banks and Human Rights
BankTrack assessed Deutsche Bank in its 2024 Global Human Rights Benchmark, where it achieved 7 points out of 15 and was ranked as a “follower”.
The bank scored 0.5 out of 3 points on the new “specific rights indicators”, which assess how banks address human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples’ right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent and environmental rights in their policies and practices.
In addition, Deutsche Bank scored 0.15 out of 3 on how it responds to alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, which were raised by civil society organisations. More information is detailed in the “Accountability” section of this profile.
The table below shows BankTrack's assessment of how Deutsche Bank has implemented the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Please click on 'expand all details' and 'explanation' for further information on the methodology.
Our policy assessments are always a work in progress. We very much welcome any feedback, especially from banks included in the assessments. Please get in touch at humanrights@banktrack.org.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2022
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Deutsche Bank
DEU
7
Front runner
7
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 6.5 points
7 - 10 points
10.5 - 14 points
For more details see this page.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2024
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Deutsche Bank
DEU
7
Follower
7
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Moderate achiever
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 7 points
7.5 - 10.5 points
11 - 15 points
For more details see this page.
Banks and Nature
Banks and Nature
Deutsche Bank’s policies for forest-risk sectors (beef, soy, palm oil, pulp and paper, rubber and timber) have been assessed by the Forests & Finance coalition, achieving an overall score of 4.8 out of 10 and ranking it as a front runner. Deutsche Bank achieved a score of 2.4 out of 10 specifically for its policies related to the beef sector and 5 out of 10 for its policies related to the palm oil sector. In addition, BankTrack and the Environmental Paper Network have assessed Deutsche Bank’s policies related to the pulp and paper sector.
Between 2016 and 2022, Deutsche Bank provided USD 1,117 in credit to companies operating in these forest-risk sectors and held investments amounting to USD 247 as of 2022. For more information, see the links below.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Overall scores
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its policies. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Beef
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its beef policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Palm Oil
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its palm oil policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Tracking the NZBA
Tracking the Net Zero Banking Alliance
Deutsche Bank is a member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) and has therefore committed to reduce its financed emissions to net zero by 2050; within 18 months of joining the alliance set interim targets for 2030 (or sooner) for high emission priority sectors, and within 36 months set further sector targets; set new intermediary targets every 5 years from 2030 onwards; annually publish data on emissions and progress against a transition strategy including climate-related sectoral policies; and take a robust approach to the role of offsets in transition plans. BankTrack track's implementation of these commitments in the NZBA compliance tracker.
Banks and Steel
Banks and Steel
As part of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), Deutsche Bank is required to set interim targets for 2030 for high emission priority sectors. For Deutsche Bank, this includes its lending to the steel sector. You can see Deutsche Bank’s iron and steel decarbonisation targets, and its progress towards meeting them in our NZBA steel targets compliance tracker:
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance’s 2023 report on metallurgical coal financing showed that Deutsche Bank provided US$ 4.1 billion in loans and underwriting to developers of new metallurgical coal between 2016 and 2022. Find further details on Deutsche Bank’s metallurgical coal financing and and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
Reclaim Finance tracks the metallurgical coal policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool. BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of Deutsche Bank’s metallurgical coal policy below.
According to a report by Reclaim Finance, between 2016 and June 2023, Deutsche provided $4.1 billion in finance to the fossil-steel industry, making it the 36th largest financier worldwide. Find further details on Deutsche's steel financing and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
Banks and Russia
Banks and Russian Aggression in Ukraine
BankTrack is keeping track of the public response of Deutsche Bank to Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Deutsche Bank has publicly condemned the war. Deutsche Bank is considered by Leave-Russia.org to be "withdrawn" from Russia. We categorise its exposure to Russia as moderate, with over $1.5 billion of financial assets. Deutsche Bank supports the Russian fossil fuel industry through investments, loans, and underwriting. For further details, see the table linked below.
Good Moves
Good moves
Year:
2022
2017
2014
Send feedback
on this profile