Asset managers need a more precise and decision-useful way to identify which holdings face financially material environmental, especially when that risk sits upstream in supply chains rather than in direct operations.

Existing approaches often rely on sector-country averages, generic ratings or incomplete asset-location data. That makes it hard to distinguish which companies warrant deeper review, which exposures could affect long-term value creation, and where investment teams should focus research, engagement or monitoring.

At the same time, asset managers are being asked to strengthen how they evidence financially material environmental risk while equipping portfolio managers, analysts and stewardship teams with insights they can actually use. That creates a common challenge across the investment process: translating environmental risk into a language that connects to revenues, costs, margins, resilience and valuation.