AI Safety Index - Future of Life Institute

Future of Life Institute

AI Safety Index

Summer 2025

17th July 2025

Available online at: futureoflife.org/index
Contact us: [policy@futureoflife.org](mailto:policy@futureoflife.org)

* * *

Contents

1 Executive Summary 2
1.1 Key Findings 2
1.2 Improvement opportunities by company 3
1.3 Methodology 4
1.4 Independent review panel 5
2 Introduction 6
3 Methodology 7
3.1 Companies Assessed 7
3.2 Index Design and Structure 7
3.3 Related Work and Incorporated Research 10
3.4 Data Sources and Evidence Collection 10
3.5 Grading Process and Expert Review 11
3.6 Limitations 11
4 Results 13
4.1 Key Findings 13
4.2 Improvement opportunities by company 14
4.3 Domain-level findings 15
5 Conclusions 20
Appendix A: Grading Sheets 21
Risk Assessment 22
Current Harms 33
Safety Frameworks 41
Existential Safety 48
Governance & Accountability 59
Information Sharing 71
Appendix B: Company Survey 85
Introduction 85
Whistleblowing Policies (15 Questions) 86
External Pre-Deployment Safety Testing (6 Questions) 91
Internal Deployments (3 Questions) 94
Safety Practices, Frameworks, and Teams (9 Questions) 95

About the Organization: The Future of Life Institute (FLI) is an independent
nonprofit organization with the goal of reducing large-scale risks and steering
transformative technologies to benefit humanity, with a particular focus on
artificial intelligence (AI). Learn more at futureoflife.org.

* * *

1 Executive Summary

The Future of Life Institute's AI Safety Index provides an independent assessment of seven leading AI companies'
efforts to manage both immediate harms and catastrophic risks from advanced AI systems. Conducted with
an expert review panel of distinguished AI researchers and governance specialists, this second evaluation
reveals an industry struggling to keep pace with its own rapid capability advances—with critical gaps in risk
management and safety planning that threaten our ability to control increasingly powerful AI systems.

|  | Anthropic | OpenAI | Google DeepMind | x.AI | Meta | Zhipu AI | DeepSeek |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Overall Grade | C+ | C | C- | D | D | F | F |
| Overall Score | 2.64 | 2.10 | 1.76 | 1.23 | 1.06 | 0.62 | 0.37 |
| Risk Assessment | C+ | C | C- | F | D | F | F |
| Current Harms | B- | B | C+ | D+ | D+ | D | D |
| Safety Frameworks | C | C | D+ | D+ | D+ | F | F |
| Existential Safety | D | F | D- | F | F | F | F |
| Governance & Accountability | A- | C- | D | C- | D- | D+ | D+ |
| Information Sharing | A- | B | B | C+ | D | D | F |

Grading: Uses the US GPA system for grade boundaries: A+, A, A-, B+, \[...\], F letter values corresponding to numerical values 4.3, 4.0, 3.7, 3.3, \[...\], 0.

1.1 Key Findings

• Anthropic gets the best overall grade (C+). The firm led on risk assessments, conducting the only human
participant bio-risk trials, excelled in privacy by not training on user data, conducted world-leading alignment
research, delivered strong safety benchmark performance, and demonst

... (truncated, 98 KB total)