ExitArms database exposes global arms trade behind ‘sustainable’ investments

Chinese Cyberattacks Against the ExitArms Database

Since 02.04.2025 bots with Chinese IP addresses have attacked the website exitarms.org. Over 180.000 cyberattacks have paralyzed the website. The sub-website "filter" where users can filter the ExitArms database for specific companies, war zones and states, continues to be cut down due to the cyberattacks. Thus, users currently have to use the recipients map and the suppliers map instead to search for certain arms exports. One possible motive is to stop the ExitArms database from displaying Chinese arms exports to war zones as well as group structures of Chinese arms companies and their subsidiaries and joint ventures. These attacks happened during the publication of a new update of the ExitArms database.

Database Update Key Findings

1. Leading Arms Suppliers to War Zones
   The update reveals that several major defence companies continue to supply arms to numerous war zones around the world, underscoring the arms industry’s ongoing involvement in fueling global conflicts.
   • Rostec, Russia’s state-owned arms conglomerate, tops the list with arms deliveries to 23 different war zones (the most extensive global reach)
   • Leonardo (Italy) and RTX (USA) follow closely, each supplying arms to 17 different war zones.
   • Other major suppliers include Airbus (Netherlands) with arms deliveries to 16 different war zones, Lockheed Martin (USA) with deliveries to 15 war zones, and BAE Systems (UK), NPO High-Precision Weapons (Russia), Rolls-Royce (UK), each with arms deliveries 14 war zones.
   • 741 companies were identified as having exported weapons to war zones between 2016 and 2022. For 59 additional companies, the last war-fueling arms export was recorded in 2015 and no new arms exports in 2016-2022. In addition, 119 local co-producers, although not direct exporters, are now listed for supporting warring parties by facilitating arms imports and local arms production under foreign production license.
2. Concentration of Arms Suppliers in a Few Countries
   Over half (52.9%) of all identified war-fueling companies are based in just seven countries, highlighting the geographic concentration of the global arms trade:
   • United States (114 companies),
   • Russia (75 companies),
   • Germany (53 companies),
   • China (47 companies),
   • France (40 companies),
   • United Arab Emirates (35 companies),
   • Turkey (28 companies).
3. German Arms Exporters
   German companies are significantly involved in exporting arms to war zones:
   • Airbus Defense and Space (HQ: Taufkirchen) tops the list with arms deliveries to 13 different war zones, followed by Rolls-Royce Power Systems AG (12 war zones), Volkswagen Group (9 war zones), Rheinmetall (9 war zones), Wegmann Group (7 war zones), MTU Aero Engines (6 war zones) and ThyssenKrupp (5 war zones). 
   • Volkswagen Group, Wegmann Group and ThyssenKrupp are involved via subsidiaries such as MAN Energy Solutions, MAN Truck & Bus SE, KNDS Deutschland, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Atlas Elektronik.
   • The agreement of the new German government between the parties SPD and CDU/CSU, published on 09.04.2025, states: „Export licenses have to be examined faster and more coordinated. We aim for a harmonisation of European arms exports rules.“ This means that even more German weapons could be exported to war zones in the future.
4. Arms Exports to Specific War Zones
   The analysis reveals arms deliveries to both sides of several highly volatile conflicts, showing that these arms exports do not serve the strategic goal of supporting one conflict party, but rather fuel the conflict by arming both sides:
   • Armenia and Azerbaijan: Russian companies like JSC NPO High-Precision Weapons, UralVagonZavod, and Rosoboronexport continue to supply weapons to both parties, exacerbating regional instability.
   • India and Pakistan: Arms exporters from Western companies like Airbus, Lockheed Martin, RTX, and Leonardo, along with Russian suppliers like Rosoboronexport, have supplied weapons to both countries, which are involved in longstanding regional disputes.
   • Saudi Arabia and Iran: Russian companies such as Rostec are supplying arms to both sides of the Saudi-Iranian conflict, whereby these two countries also support and arm competing conflict parties of the Yemen war.

Implications for the Debate about Arms as Sustainable Investments

The ExitArms database also has implications for the current debate on the sustainability of arms investments. While almost no bank or investment fund without a sustainability label excludes arms companies, managers of investment funds with a sustainability label - ESG funds are the most common of these funds – have often been reluctant to invest in arms in the past. Recently, however, major asset managers have started to include arms companies in their ESG funds. In Europe, one third of ESG funds already invest in arms. According to the ESMA guidelines which set the rules for investment funds in Europe, ESG funds can invest in those arms companies that do not produce certain banned weapons such as cluster bombs or chemical weapons. The EU is even discussing whether investments in arms companies with little involvement in banned weapons should also be labelled as sustainable. The German Investment Funds Association (BVI) has also changed its rules for ESG funds marketed in Germany to allow them to invest in defense companies.

ESG fund managers who start investing in arms companies, usually argue with the importance of equipping EU armies for the national defense of democratic states. Thereby, they follow the argumentation of the arms lobby which tried to portray the arms industry as ‘guarantor of security and sustainability’ already before Russia´s invasion of Ukraine. The real reason why ESG fund managers change their opinion is that defense stocks have risen sharply in value over the past three years and investment funds that did not invest in the arms industry have missed out on this return boost.

The ExitArms database shows that Western arms companies are not only equipping EU armies, but also exporting weapons to war zones worldwide such as Yemen, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Gaza, and Myanmar. Fueling these wars is unsustainable. The question of whether EU states need to invest in defense now is quite different from the question of whether ESG funds should invest in the arms industry. The fact that arms production may be necessary does not mean that investments by private financial institutions in the arms industry are sustainable. Investment managers who highlight the role of arms companies in equipping EU armies, should not turn a blind eye to arms exports to conflict parties that commit war crimes and start wars of aggression. Despite defense companies’ attempts to rebrand themselves as responsible players in global security, their ongoing involvement in fueling global conflicts shows their inability to comply with sustainability goals.

ExitArms Database Methodology

Facing Finance has analysed thousands of arms exports to war zones in the period 2016-2022. The definition of war zones is based on the Heidelberg Conflict Barometer´s criterion of conflict intensity. Only conflicts that reached conflict intensity four (limited war) or five (war) in the period from 2016 to 2022 were included. Facing Finance gathered information on the companies responsible by means of independent research. This research aimed at proving the actual direct responsibility of a company for the weapons export and not only that the respective company is the producer of this weapon. In order to research arms deliveries to war zones and to identify responsibility of individual companies for specific arms exports, we consulted the arms exports database of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, academic publications, specialist journals, subject-specific websites, commercial databases, independent web searches, defense companies websites, arms show materials, defense companies brochures, government websites and on-site research at arms shows. The responsibility of the companies covered includes the production, modernization, refurbishment, design, repair, sale and supply of arms, as well as the supply of dual-use products and the licensing of arms production on site in war zones.

ExitArms Database Access

The ExitArms database remains the only publicly accessible global resource for tracking company responsibility for arms exports to war zones. It serves as a vital tool for financial institutions, policymakers, regulators, and civil society to evaluate the ethical implications of arms exports and their connection to global conflicts. The ExitArms database provides a differentiated view on the defense sector and serves as a tool for responsible investment and lending policies as well as shareholder engagement. A customized ExitArms Investors List is available upon request for financial institutions.