How asset-level and ownership data can support more robust emissions analysis
While corporate reporting remains a crucial resource, it has well-known limitations. Coverage can be uneven, methodologies differ across companies, and many companies struggle to fully understand the emissions profiles of their own operations and value chains.
As expectations for credible transition planning continue to rise, there is a growing interest in complementary sources of evidence that provide a more detailed picture of companies’ real-world activities.
One way this can be achieved is through asset-level and ownership data. By linking physical assets, such as facilities and infrastructure, to their ownership structures, these datasets can provide more granular insights into emission sources, corporate footprints, and the attribution of emissions across corporate entities.
This has important implications for corporate accountability. Asset-level data can help stakeholders assess not only what companies say they intend to do, but also how their underlying asset portfolios are evolving in practice.
To explore this opportunity, Arc launched its asset-level data programme in 2025 with Global Energy Monitor (GEM) and Climate TRACE. Building on this collaboration, we convened 12 leading organisations [i] during London Climate Action Week 2026, including data and sustainability specialists, financial institutions, investor coalitions, and research and philanthropic organisations, to discuss how asset-level data can strengthen corporate transition analysis
Three priorities for advancing asset-level transition analysis
1. Asset-level data can strengthen transition assessments
Participants identified several ways in which asset-level data can complement existing disclosure-based approaches.
- First, it can help fill gaps where companies do not report emissions, supporting more comprehensive assessments of financed emissions and portfolio exposure. Because asset-level data enables a more consistent basis for analysis, it can help identify possible mistakes or inconsistencies in reported data, improve comparability across companies and sectors, and provide an independent evidence base even if disclosure guidelines change in the future.
- Second, asset-level data can be used for benchmarking and scrutiny of high emitters. Investors and other stakeholders can compare corporate commitments with actual asset holdings and examine whether companies have the investments and solutions needed to deliver their transition plans.
- Third, forward-looking asset-level data can help reconcile corporate targets with real-world activities. Corporate emissions targets can be difficult to interpret or compare. Asset-level data can provide independent evidence on what companies are building, acquiring, retiring, or developing, allowing investors to test the credibility of transition plans and identify market-relevant signals earlier.
- For asset managers, asset owners and banks, this forward-looking perspective is a key benefit. Asset-level data can improve the richness of capital allocation metrics by incorporating carbon trajectories, development status, announced projects, regional differences, and sector-specific transition pathways.
Asset-level data must solve real pain points that stakeholders face, such as gaps in portfolio and disclosure coverage.
2. Methodology matters as much as the data
A recurring theme was that asset-level data should not be presented as inherently more accurate than, or a replacement for corporate disclosures.
Its value depends heavily on transparent and robust methodologies for defining corporate boundaries, ownership structures across subsidiaries and joint ventures, how Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions are treated, and sector-specific assumptions.
Participants noted that different methodological choices can materially affect results and even obscure relevant emissions. Building confidence in these approaches will therefore be critical for broader adoption.
The discussion also highlighted a practical consideration: asset-level data must solve real pain points that stakeholders face, such as gaps in portfolio and disclosure coverage, limited transparency on fixed income emissions, and the need for more decision-useful transition metrics. Ensuring that asset-level data is ready to use in real-world decisions will be essential to move from experimental use cases into mainstream financial decision-making.
3. The focus now is practical implementation
Arc has already begun combining asset-level data with corporate adaptation disclosures in ResilienceArc to provide a more complete picture of companies’ exposure to physical climate risks, and the actions they are taking to build resilience.
The next phase of the programme will focus on bringing emissions profiles from the asset-level data developed by Arc, GEM, and Climate TRACE, into transition analysis on TransitionArc to help meet the needs identified through these explorations.
Alongside this, Arc will continue working with other analysis providers, financial institutions, corporates, and policymakers to ensure the programme delivers insights that address the practical needs and challenges of decision makers.
A more complete picture of transition progress
The workshop reinforced a broader conclusion: the future of corporate transition analysis is unlikely to be a choice between corporate disclosures and asset-level data. Instead, it is likely to depend on combining both approaches in a transparent and methodologically rigorous way.
Corporate disclosures remain essential, but asset-level data can provide an independent view of how companies’ underlying asset portfolios are changing over time and help connect transition commitments to real-world activity.
Together, these sources can support more comparable, forward-looking, and decision-useful assessments of corporate transition progress, strengthening the evidence base for better and more resilient transition decisions.
[1] Participants included Arc, Global Energy Monitor, Climate TRACE, Applied Works, Asset Impact, Carbon Tracker, Climate Policy Initiative, Forward Analytics, Generation Foundation, Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, Nuveen, RMI, SBTi, TransitionZero, World Benchmarking Alliance.
Interested in collaborating or learning more about our asset-level work or ResilienceArc?
