Overview / ESG

Disclosure that holds up under audit — asset by asset, every reporting cycle.

Asset-level disclosure across CSRD/ESRS, EU Taxonomy, SFDR and AIFMD II, aggregated to portfolio and fund level — computed from curated public data, with a methodology that any auditor can follow to source, and reproduced every reporting cycle rather than bought once. We are the author of the disclosure, not merely its messenger.

The frameworks we disclose against.

Supported

CSRD / ESRS

Scope 1/2/3, avoided emissions, and the ESRS topical standards, per asset and rolled to the fund.

Supported

EU Taxonomy

Activity 4.10 substantial-contribution screening + DNSH, with the Article 8 turnover/CapEx/OpEx KPI.

Supported

SFDR

Principal adverse impact (PAI) indicators for Article 8/9 fund reporting.

Supported

AIFMD II

Risk-management and liquidity framing at fund level, aligned to Directive 2024/927.

Beyond EU

Australia AASB S2

ISSB-aligned climate disclosure — the same engine, a non-EU jurisdiction.

View the sample →
Italy
Live end-to-end
40+
Jurisdictions scaffolded
Public data
No proprietary black box
Honest scope: compliance disclosure is live for Italy today (asset and portfolio), with the framework lattice scaffolded across 40+ jurisdictions and Australia demonstrated as the first beyond-EU example. We show what renders; we don't claim what doesn't.

Community and grid — in regulatory terms.

Our valuation prices what an asset returns to its owner, its investors, its community and the grid. On the disclosure side, that same community- and grid-impact analysis isn't a figure — it's evidence: we cross-walk each dimension to the obligation it satisfies, so the ESRS and Taxonomy claims are shown, not asserted.

ESRS S3 · SFDR PAI

Affected communities

Local health, energy access and welfare effects, mapped to the "affected communities" standard and the relevant principal-adverse-impact indicators.

Taxonomy 4.10 · ESRS E1

Grid & system contribution

The substation's role in absorbing renewables and deferring network reinforcement — the substance behind the Activity 4.10 "substantial contribution to climate-change mitigation" test.

ESRS E4 · DNSH

Ecosystems & biodiversity

Land use and proximity to protected areas, screened against the biodiversity standard and the Taxonomy do-no-significant-harm criteria.

One engine

Evidenced at the node

The same substation-level model that computes community and grid value backs these disclosures — a bridge the pure compliance houses can't make.

We separate the worlds on purpose: the monetary value lives in the valuation report, the obligations live here. A disclosure never asserts a financial figure — it points to the analysis that stands behind it.

Community & environment — shown as evidence.

Rendered by the platform, every figure traceable to a curated public source. Illustrative output on Ikenga's own methodology portfolios.

Environmental externalities — avoided carbon and air pollutants
Community value · environment
Avoided carbon & air-pollutant damage — €0.52M of welfare value, cross-walked to ESRS E1/E4.

What a sample report contains.

Every disclosure is a rendered document, not a score. The redacted sample walks the full structure — figures dummied, methodology intact.

01

Cover & asset identity — node, capacity, connection

02

Double-materiality assessment

03

Scope 1/2/3 — with Battery-Reg lifecycle carbon

04

EU Taxonomy alignment + DNSH 6-criteria

05

SFDR PAI indicators

06

Community & grid cross-walk — ESRS S3 / E4 / Taxonomy 4.10

07

Audit trail — every figure to its curated public source