28 April 2026
Coverage is easy to state, but much harder to substantiate
Across real assets, the direction of travel is clear: greater transparency, stronger accountability, and more rigorous ESG reporting. As expectations evolve, so too does the level of scrutiny applied to how data is gathered, validated and presented.
In energy and carbon reporting, most portfolios can point to some level of coverage, typically drawn from utility bills, meter readings and internal tracking. However, when investors or assessors probe further, asking whether data is complete, consistent, and supported by audit trails, the discussion often shifts. Coverage alone does not necessarily indicate reliability; confidence in the underlying data becomes equally important.
Data gaps are not always immediately visible, but they can influence how disclosures are interpreted. Missing assets, misaligned reporting periods, or reliance on tenant-controlled data can introduce uncertainty. Frameworks such as GRESB place increasing emphasis not only on disclosure, but on the completeness and robustness of supporting evidence.
As one of arbnco’s technical leads explains:
“Having worked with dozens of our clients over the last few years, supporting them with meter matching and optimising their ESG reporting data, it is consistency that really makes the difference. We typically see data coverage starting at 70–80% for a brand new portfolio of commercial property. But those that have focused on occupier engagement and built data-sharing processes into standard leases are approaching 100% coverage and accuracy in years 2 and beyond. They are then able to start planning and budgeting for carbon reduction and are truly on the journey to net zero.”
– Stephen Preece, Director of Technical Sales
In practice, most data is often relatively accessible. Greater complexity tends to arise in the remaining portion of a portfolio – smaller assets, fragmented ownership structures, or limited access to tenant data – where consistency and verification can be more difficult to achieve.
Establishing standardised processes, applying validation checks, and maintaining clear audit trails can help strengthen data quality over time. Technology can support this, particularly when aligned with day-to-day operational workflows, but it is most effective when paired with clear governance and defined responsibilities.
For investors and other stakeholders, the focus is not solely on reported metrics, but on how those metrics are produced. Robust energy data can contribute to stronger disclosures and more credible reporting narratives. In this context, the distinction is less about the volume of data collected, and more about the level of assurance behind it.
arbnco’s services
arbnco has worked with organisations including CBRE, Centrica, British Land and Assura on approaches to improving the completeness and usability of energy data, supporting more consistent and well-evidenced ESG reporting outcomes. Visit our resources page to view case studies on recent projects.
