Governance scores
Tech100 AI Ethics & Governance Index ranking and filters.
Tech100 AI Ethics & Gov Index – Constituents
Showing 25 of 100 companies (preview). Verify your email to unlock the full list.
| Rank | Weight | Company | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | Composite AI Governance & Ethics Score | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4% |
Microsoft
(MSFT)
|
98.0 | 96.0 | 98.0 | 86.0 | 79.0 | 91.0 |
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 98.0 | 96.0 | 98.0 | 86.0 | 79.0 | 91.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Cisco (CSCO)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company held its position at #2, unchanged from 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 91.4 versus 94.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-2.6). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-14.0), Ethical Principles (+1.0), and Regulatory Alignment (+1.0). Cisco maintains one of the clearer, operationalised public programmes in this set: its responsible AI materials describe incident management (AI incidents tracked and reported to a Responsible AI Committee), and it publishes governance frameworks and transparency documentation (including technical notes for models used in collaboration products). Within the 2026 window, Cisco's January 2026 release of the Data and Privacy Benchmark Study framed AI expansion as reshaping privacy's scope and highlighted a governance maturity gap across organisations-an executive statement positioning privacy/data governance as core "infrastructure" for responsible AI. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (95), Ethical Principles (94), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (80).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 95.0 | 94.0 | 94.0 | 94.0 | 80.0 | 91.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Alphabet (Google) (GOOGL)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company held its position at #3, unchanged from 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 88.6 versus 89.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-0.4). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-14.0), Ethical Principles (+5.0), and Regulatory Alignment (+3.0). Google published a 2026 Responsible AI Progress Report describing a layered governance model spanning research, policies/frameworks, testing, mitigation, monitoring/enforcement, and launch review/reporting, and explicitly references transparency artefacts such as model cards. For the post-2026-01-01 period, this is among the most detailed public disclosures in the cohort, evidencing systematic pre-launch review and post-launch monitoring as named mechanisms rather than only high-level principles. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (96), Governance Structure (93), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (80).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 96.0 | 87.0 | 93.0 | 87.0 | 80.0 | 89.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Verisk Analytics (VRSK)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 1 place to #4 from #5 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 88.0 versus 88.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.0). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-8.0), Transparency (+3.0), and Ethical Principles (+2.0). Verisk's ethical and responsible AI commitment document presents a formal governance architecture: an AI Governance Board (co-chaired by Chief Privacy Officer and Chief Data Officer), policy ownership by the Chief Information Officer, and board-level escalation pathways (via risk committees). It also describes operational requirements such as AI inventories and AI system assessments through a governance hierarchy. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Governance Structure (93), Ethical Principles (92), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (73).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 91.0 | 92.0 | 93.0 | 91.0 | 73.0 | 88.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Adobe (ADBE)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 2 places to #5 from #7 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 84.4 versus 84.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.4). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-11.0), Ethical Principles (+4.0), and Governance Structure (+4.0). Adobe's AI ethics programme is comparatively operationalised: engineers submit AI Ethics Impact Assessments, and higher-risk features can be reviewed by a cross-functional AI Ethics Review Board. Adobe's enterprise-facing materials reiterate the same governance model and oversight approach. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (93), Ethical Principles (89), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (65).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 93.0 | 89.0 | 89.0 | 86.0 | 65.0 | 84.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Autodesk (ADSK)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 6 places to #6 from #12 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 82.8 versus 80.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+2.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Ethical Principles (+7.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-6.0), and Transparency (+6.0). Autodesk provides a comparatively concrete transparency practice: a Trusted AI programme "led by the Chief Trust Officer" and governed by an internal Trust Organization, plus AI transparency cards describing individual AI features, data sources, and safeguards. The Trusted AI PDF also references collaboration with the National Institute of Standards and Technology's US Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute Consortium (a partnership signal) and describes governance/risk/compliance processes to inventory and mitigate AI risks. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Governance Structure (90), Transparency (87), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (69).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 87.0 | 84.0 | 90.0 | 84.0 | 69.0 | 83.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Intuit (INTU)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 6 places to #7 from #13 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 80.6 versus 80.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.6). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-21.0), Governance Structure (+9.0), and Transparency (+7.0). Intuit gives unusually explicit disclosures on AI governance structure for this cohort: it describes a Responsible AI governance approach including an AI Governance Committee and board-level oversight via an Audit and Risk Committee. Intuit also publishes Responsible AI principles and released its 2025 Stakeholder Impact Report (posted 28 Jan 2026), a key accountability artefact in the review window. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (86), Transparency (84), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (71).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 84.0 | 86.0 | 81.0 | 81.0 | 71.0 | 81.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
NVIDIA (NVDA)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 4 places to #8 from #4 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 80.2 versus 88.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-7.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Governance Structure (-24.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-20.0), and Ethical Principles (+6.0). NVIDIA's AI Trust Center articulates a Trustworthy AI approach and makes available practical transparency tooling, including a model card generator, signalling a focus on documentation and customer-facing artefacts. No post-2026-01-01 update was identified in the sources reviewed, and publicly disclosed board/committee structures were not confirmed in this research set. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (93), Ethical Principles (86), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (70).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 70.0 | 82.0 | 70.0 | 80.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Cognizant (CTSH)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 3 places to #9 from #6 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 79.2 versus 85.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-5.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-16.0), Governance Structure (-10.0), and Transparency (-9.0). Cognizant publishes responsible AI standards grounded in its code of ethics and describes implementation through structured governance and ongoing improvement informed by risk assessments. A notable public commitment (outside the 2026 window but relevant to governance posture) is its accredited ISO/International Electrotechnical Commission 42001 certification announcement for an Artificial Intelligence management system. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, partial public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (90), Regulatory Alignment (84), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (65).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 78.0 | 90.0 | 79.0 | 84.0 | 65.0 | 79.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Intel (INTC)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 1 place to #10 from #9 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 78.0 versus 84.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-6.0). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-16.0), Transparency (-8.0), and Governance Structure (-6.0). Intel publishes Responsible Artificial Intelligence principles and describes internal review mechanisms (including advisory councils reviewing AI development activities against set principles) as part of its operationalisation approach. In the post-2026-01-01 window, no newly dated AI ethics/governance policy or incident reporting update was identified from the public sources reviewed; disclosures are process-oriented but not strongly evidenced via public model-level artefacts in this dataset. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, partial public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (88), Regulatory Alignment (85), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (64).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 78.0 | 88.0 | 75.0 | 85.0 | 64.0 | 78.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Arm Holdings (ARM)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 6 places to #11 from #17 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 77.4 versus 75.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+2.4). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-19.0), Transparency (+18.0), and Governance Structure (+9.0). Arm discloses a formal governance mechanism in its Code of Conduct: an Artificial Intelligence Ethics Review Committee (AI Ethics Committee) that reviews and advises on ethical aspects of AI-related systems, projects, and products, and a requirement for AI ethics training for staff working in AI. While these disclosures predate 2026, they indicate that Arm's operational model emphasises committee-based review and workforce training as core controls; no public post-2026-01-01 update was located. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (88), Regulatory Alignment (84), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (66).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 68.0 | 88.0 | 81.0 | 84.0 | 66.0 | 77.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Honeywell (HON)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 8 places to #12 from #20 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 77.2 versus 72.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+5.2). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Regulatory Alignment (+11.0), Governance Structure (+7.0), and Ethical Principles (+6.0). Honeywell discloses both principled and structural elements. It publishes Responsible Artificial Intelligence Principles, and its Impact Report describes implementing a Responsible AI Governance Framework (with oversight, record keeping, and monitoring) under a Data & AI Steering Committee, with a Responsible AI Policy as the core. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as advanced. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (87), Transparency (87), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (53).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 87.0 | 87.0 | 84.0 | 75.0 | 53.0 | 77.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Fiserv (FISV)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 2 places to #13 from #11 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 76.2 versus 80.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-3.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-15.0), Governance Structure (-9.0), and Ethical Principles (+5.0). Fiserv's Corporate Social Responsibility reporting describes an "AI governance program" with cross-functional representation and includes responsible AI use guidelines plus training prior to access to certain AI platforms. These disclosures focus on internal controls and workforce enablement; no post-2026-01-01 AI ethics policy update or formal external audit/public model artefact was identified in the sources reviewed. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, partial public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (88), Regulatory Alignment (82), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (63).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 69.0 | 88.0 | 79.0 | 82.0 | 63.0 | 76.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
GE HealthCare (GEHC)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 6 places to #14 from #8 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 74.8 versus 84.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-9.2). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Governance Structure (-18.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-15.0), and Regulatory Alignment (-9.0). GE HealthCare publishes Responsible AI principles tailored to healthcare and argues for practical implementation ("from theory to practice"). In January 2026, GE HealthCare research commentary highlighted governance-oriented AI/data principles-including robust controls, continuous monitoring, audit trails, rollback, and clear accountability among vendors and partners-indicating a risk-management framing aligned with clinical safety expectations. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (90), Regulatory Alignment (86), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (60).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 76.0 | 90.0 | 62.0 | 86.0 | 60.0 | 75.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
NXP Semiconductors (NXPI)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 5 places to #15 from #10 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 72.2 versus 83.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-10.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-21.0), Governance Structure (-20.0), and Transparency (-18.0). NXP has published an Ethical Framework for Artificial Intelligence (white paper) and previously announced an AI ethics initiative; however, these artefacts predate the 2026 window. No new policy update dated after 1 Jan 2026 was located in the sources reviewed, and governance structures (committees/officers) were not confirmed from accessible primary sources in this session. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and limited verified public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as emerging. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (88), Regulatory Alignment (79), while the main relative gap remains Transparency (63).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 63.0 | 88.0 | 66.0 | 79.0 | 65.0 | 72.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Comcast (CMCSA)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 9 places to #16 from #25 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 71.6 versus 69.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+2.6). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Ethical Principles (+15.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-14.0), and Governance Structure (+7.0). Comcast discloses governance intent in sustainability-accounting disclosures: it states that AI should be used responsibly, transparently, and accountably, with "dedicated oversight and working groups" within key business units to oversee AI uses aligned with AI principles and governance guidance, and that AI uses should meet privacy and security standards. In the 2026 window, public communications referencing AI were more business/market focused (for example, reporting on AI in advertising), rather than publication of detailed model-level artefacts or a standalone AI ethics framework. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, clear public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Governance Structure (84), Ethical Principles (72), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (60).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 71.0 | 72.0 | 84.0 | 71.0 | 60.0 | 72.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
PayPal (PYPL)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 9 places to #17 from #26 on 01 Jan 2026. It enters the top 25 for the April rebalance and receives a 4.00% index weight. Entry into the top 25 was driven mainly by relative reranking across the universe rather than by a large absolute score increase. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 69.4 versus 69.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.4). Pillar scores were effectively unchanged quarter on quarter. The broader 100-company Q1 review indicates that Given PayPal's heavily regulated industry (finance), it aligns its AI governance closely with regulatory requirements. PayPal proactively contributed to the EU's policymaking by sharing its practices in the 2024 EC consultation on AI in financial, signaling willingness to shape and comply with upcoming rules like the EU AI Act. This name was not part of the separate 25-company constituent deep review, so the April update relies primarily on the broader 100-company evidence base. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (76), Regulatory Alignment (74), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (62).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 62.0 | 76.0 | 62.0 | 74.0 | 73.0 | 69.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
AMD (AMD)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 2 places to #18 from #16 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 69.2 versus 76.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-6.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-19.0), Governance Structure (-16.0), and Ethical Principles (+9.0). AMD publishes a Responsible AI Use Policy that sets expectations and prohibited uses intended to reduce misuse and harm. In the 2026 window, no additional publicly dated governance structure (committee/officer reporting line) or external assurance practices (audits, model cards, published impact assessments) were identified from the sources reviewed, so those fields remain unspecified. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (81), Regulatory Alignment (78), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (60).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 66.0 | 81.0 | 60.0 | 78.0 | 61.0 | 69.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Palo Alto Networks (PANW)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 2 places to #19 from #21 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 69.2 versus 72.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-2.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-18.0), Ethical Principles (+10.0), and Regulatory Alignment (-6.0). Palo Alto Networks' Trust Center provides "Responsible AI in Our Products" documentation, positioning its programme around disclosed principles and governance frameworks guiding development, deployment, and management of AI across products, with explicit reference to compliance with AI regulations. Within the post-2026-01-01 window, no uniquely dated policy update was identified in sources reviewed; governance is described at a framework level rather than as a named committee/officer reporting line. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, partial public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (80), Regulatory Alignment (78), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (59).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 63.0 | 80.0 | 66.0 | 78.0 | 59.0 | 69.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
AstraZeneca (AZN)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 7 places to #20 from #27 on 01 Jan 2026. It enters the top 25 for the April rebalance and receives a 4.00% index weight. Entry into the top 25 was driven mainly by relative reranking across the universe rather than by a large absolute score increase. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 69.0 versus 69.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.0). Pillar scores were effectively unchanged quarter on quarter. The broader 100-company Q1 review indicates that AstraZeneca is keenly aligned with regulatory expectations on AI, as it cannot deploy AI in healthcare without satisfying stringent requirements. It actively engages with regulators on how AI should be governed in pharma. This name was not part of the separate 25-company constituent deep review, so the April update relies primarily on the broader 100-company evidence base. Current strengths are most visible in Regulatory Alignment (81), Ethical Principles (70), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (61).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 63.0 | 70.0 | 61.0 | 81.0 | 70.0 | 69.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Qualcomm (QCOM)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 3 places to #21 from #18 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 68.6 versus 74.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-5.4). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Governance Structure (-15.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-14.0), and Ethical Principles (+6.0). Qualcomm's most clearly dated governance development in the review window is the update of its Responsible AI License (last revision shown as 17 Feb 2026), indicating an explicit licensing mechanism intended to constrain downstream applications or uses. Qualcomm also highlights public commitments such as signing the Rome Call for AI Ethics, and it published an executive op-ed in February 2026 on the next chapter of AI. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (87), Regulatory Alignment (72), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (56).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 71.0 | 87.0 | 57.0 | 72.0 | 56.0 | 69.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Apple (AAPL)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved down 8 places to #22 from #14 on 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 68.0 versus 78.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-10.0). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Governance Structure (-16.0), Stakeholder Engagement (-14.0), and Ethical Principles (-8.0). Apple's publicly accessible technical reporting on its foundation models describes Responsible AI safeguards and data controls, including mechanisms that allow publishers to opt out of certain web crawling via robots.txt for training. Within the 2026 window, no newly dated standalone AI governance framework or committee structure was identified in the sources reviewed; governance is disclosed largely through product and research documentation rather than a corporate AI governance charter. The separate constituent review found partial public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and partial public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Ethical Principles (77), Transparency (75), while the main relative gap remains Stakeholder Engagement (57).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 75.0 | 77.0 | 59.0 | 72.0 | 57.0 | 68.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Atlassian (TEAM)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 5 places to #23 from #28 on 01 Jan 2026. It enters the top 25 for the April rebalance and receives a 4.00% index weight. Entry into the top 25 was driven mainly by relative reranking across the universe rather than by a large absolute score increase. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 68.0 versus 68.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.0). Pillar scores were effectively unchanged quarter on quarter. The broader 100-company Q1 review indicates that Atlassian has positioned itself as strongly supportive of smart AI regulation and has moved early to comply with and shape such regulations. This name was not part of the separate 25-company constituent deep review, so the April update relies primarily on the broader 100-company evidence base. Current strengths are most visible in Stakeholder Engagement (75), Regulatory Alignment (71), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (60).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 65.0 | 69.0 | 60.0 | 71.0 | 75.0 | 68.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Amazon (AMZN)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company held its position at #24, unchanged from 01 Jan 2026. It remains in the top 25 and keeps a 4.00% index weight. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 67.2 versus 71.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (-3.8). The main quarter-on-quarter score drivers were Stakeholder Engagement (-25.0), Ethical Principles (+16.0), and Regulatory Alignment (-11.0). Amazon's responsible AI materials (including Amazon Web Services guidance) describe a principles-to-practice approach, emphasising risk assessment, lifecycle controls, and transparency artefacts such as "AI service cards." In the post-2026-01-01 window, no newly dated corporate-level governance restructuring was identified from sources reviewed; disclosures are nevertheless relatively operational (tools/guides), especially through Amazon Web Services documentation. The separate constituent review found clear public evidence of published principles, limited verified public evidence of governance structure, and clear public evidence of concrete practices, and classified the name as developing. No company-specific regulatory-action or incident penalty was applied in the constituent review. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (84), Ethical Principles (72), while the main relative gap remains Governance Structure (45).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 84.0 | 72.0 | 45.0 | 70.0 | 65.0 | 67.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Seagate Technology (STX)
At the 01 Apr 2026 rebalance, the company moved up 4 places to #25 from #29 on 01 Jan 2026. It enters the top 25 for the April rebalance and receives a 4.00% index weight. Entry into the top 25 was driven mainly by relative reranking across the universe rather than by a large absolute score increase. The recalculated AI Governance & Ethics Score (AIGES) composite is 66.2 versus 66.0 on 01 Jan 2026 (+0.2). Pillar scores were effectively unchanged quarter on quarter. The broader 100-company Q1 review indicates that Seagate has emphasized AI's impact on data storage rather than publishing AI ethics policies. In April 2025 it released a report ("Decarbonizing Data") highlighting how AI-driven data growth is straining energy and carbon. This name was not part of the separate 25-company constituent deep review, so the April update relies primarily on the broader 100-company evidence base. Current strengths are most visible in Transparency (71), Ethical Principles (67), while the main relative gap remains Regulatory Alignment (63).
History
| As-of date | Transparency | Ethical Principles | Governance Structure | Regulatory Alignment | Stakeholder Engagement | AIGES Composite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-01 | 71.0 | 67.0 | 67.0 | 63.0 | 63.0 | 66.0 |
Only the latest rebalance is available. Historical scores will appear as new rebalances are added.
Free and unlimited access — we’ll email a 6-digit code.
Explore Tech100 AI Ethics & Governance Index resources
Navigate the index breakdown, performance, and methodology from one place.
Performance & attribution
See contributors, return breakdowns, and performance trends.
Go to performance →Portfolio analytics
Compare supported model portfolios, risk, concentration, and sector tilts.
Open portfolio analytics →