ESG reporting software that checks every figure before anyone signs
One cited dataset for CSRD, ISSB, lenders and investors, checked before anyone signs.
See one case, screen by screen ↓ESG Reporting is ESG reporting software that drafts your CSRD/ESRS sustainability statement and your IFRS S1/S2 climate report from one cited dataset. Seven agents propose material impacts, map the datapoints once, gather and question the data, draft each section with citations and check every figure against the accounts and past claims. Topic owners approve their sections, the Financial Controller signs agreement with the accounts and the Head of Sustainability signs the statement.
How to choose AI solutions for back-office and enterprise work →
Updated
A sustainability statement now has to survive assurance like the accounts. The double materiality assessment decides the material topics, and those topics decide about 400 ESRS datapoints. The data comes back by email from dozens of owners in HR, EHS, facilities, procurement and finance, often without evidence. The text is copied from last year and the numbers updated. Then the same figures are mapped again, in other spreadsheets, for the ISSB climate report, the lender's sustainability-linked loan KPIs and the investor questionnaire.
The risk sits in what nobody re-checks. A reduction claim from a November deck, calculated against a base year that was later recalculated for a divestment. An intensity ratio built on forecast revenue rather than the revenue in the notes. A comparative that differs from last year's published statement. Each slips through until the assurer ties it out, or a regulator applying the new rules on green claims finds it.
Estimated split for one reporting cycle at a diversified group, from the first data request to a review-ready statement, by hand and with the solution.
Seven agents propose, map, gather, draft and check every figure; topic owners approve, the Financial Controller and the Head of Sustainability sign.
Kestrel & Vane Group — a diversified group of about 40,000 people in 30 countries, listed in London — is drafting its FY2026 sustainability statement. Larkspur & Moss begin limited-assurance fieldwork in 14 days. Here is one Monday morning, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Leila opens Today. 371 of 412 datapoints are ready, 29 in review and 12 gaps; 4 of 9 checks need a decision; 3 of 8 sections are approved; fieldwork starts Monday 22 February. On the right the agents talk to her in plain sentences, each with its sources: the Mapping agent, the Consistency agent and the Data agent. At the top of “Needs you” is one item.
Consistency agent · 06:05: “The draft says Scope 1 fell 18%; the data says 14.2%.”
Materiality to statement puts the chain on one screen: the material topics from the double materiality assessment, the ESRS datapoints E1 Climate change requires (86 of 92 ready), and the drafted E1-6 paragraph with every number cited. Each datapoint carries the other outputs it serves — IFRS S2, Lender, Investor. The 18% in the text carries an amber underline and a “C-07” chip.
“Drafted by the Drafter agent, 06:02 · checked by the Consistency agent, 06:05.”
She re-runs E1 and watches the plan play out. The Mapping agent confirms 92 datapoints for 6 material IROs. The Data agent refreshes 41 values from the GHG inventory, the energy data platform and the Scope 3 draft. The Drafter redrafts E1-6 and E1-4/5 with 11 numbers and 11 citations. The Consistency agent runs 214 comparisons and finds one issue, then checks the Drafter: 11 of 11 numbers agree with their source.
Hand-off: “C-07 and the section approval wait for Leila Haddad, the topic owner. No text changes until she approves.”
The 18% compared 2026 Scope 1 of 12,480 tCO2e with the original 2022 base year of 15,220 tCO2e, as on slide 14 of the capital markets day deck. After the Tarvos foundry was divested, the base year was recalculated to 14,546 tCO2e under the group's 3% policy. Against it, Scope 1 is 14.2% lower. The same claim sits in the statement, the CEO letter and the investor climate questionnaire; one correction fixes all three.
“1 − 12,480 ÷ 14,546 = 14.2%. The 18% used 1 − 12,480 ÷ 15,220 = 18.0%.”
Leila asks in plain words, under the check. The Consistency agent answers with its sources: the deck was built from an older template that used the base year as first reported. It has added the deck to the claims register so the next deck is checked too, and offers to open the recalculation memo.
The Consistency agent never applies a correction itself and never decides between two sources.
She approves the correction with reason code “R2 Base year recalculated”; the statement, the CEO letter and the investor answer change together. With no open check left, she approves section E1 with her e-signature and “R6 Approved as drafted”. Four of eight sections are now approved.
“A later change to any value it reports reopens it.”
Check C-08 is Marcus's alone. Waste intensity in E5-5 divides 21,860 t by €6,910M, the November forecast; net revenue in Note 4 of the consolidated financial statements is €6,842M, so the ratio should be 3.20 t per €M, not 3.16. It appears in the statement and an investor answer. Only Marcus can approve it, edit it or reject it.
“It never changes a word itself; the owner of each check decides.”
Ostrava's water withdrawal came in at 214,800 m³, up 38% on 2025 and over the 15% threshold. The Data agent asked the plant what changed; Jana Dvořák, its EHS contact, answered with the work order for a second cooling tower on line 2. The agent checked the design figures and recommends accepting the value, with confidence 93%. Accepting it, or returning it with a reason, is a person's call.
Data agent: “The work order expects 55,000–62,000 m³ a year more; the increase is 59,100 m³, inside that range.”
Each topic owner approves their own section. Marcus signs that every figure taken from the financial statements agrees with them, once C-08 is decided and C-05 is reconciled to Note 7. Leila signs the statement last, and only when every section is approved, no check is open, the Financial Controller has signed and the digital tags are validated.
Larkspur & Moss's engagement is limited assurance under ISSA 5000, early application. The Assurance agent builds a pack per section from the citations and drafts answers to the assurer's questions from the record — AQ-04 asks for the base-year recalculation memo and proof the Tarvos divestment completed. Hana Novak releases each pack; nothing reaches the assurer until she does.
Audit trail: “Assurance agent · Built the E1 evidence pack: 58 items, ready for Hana Novak to release.”
The same FY2026 statement, seen by five of the people who carry it — what the cycle looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven agents propose, map, gather, draft and check every figure; topic owners approve, the Financial Controller and the Head of Sustainability sign.
Proposes impacts, risks and opportunities from survey answers, interviews, peer reports and sector guidance, scores impact and financial materiality with a confidence, and quotes the passages it relied on.
Derives the ESRS datapoints for each material topic once, and maps the same values to the IFRS S1/S2 requirements, the lender's KPIs and the investor questions; flags phase-ins.
Sends requests to owners and systems, chases on the SLA, validates ranges, units and year-on-year change, and asks the owner about an outlier before the value is used.
Writes each section in the group's voice from approved values, last year's text and the topic owner's notes, with a citation on every number.
Checks every figure against the financial statements, last year's published statement, base-year recalculations, earlier public claims, other sections and other outputs, and proposes one correction for every place a claim appears.
Tags each datapoint for the digital format, validates the tags and assembles the output packages.
Builds evidence packs per section from the citations and drafts answers to the assurer's questions from the record.
Approve sections, sign consistency with the accounts and sign the statement. The agents propose; a named person decides.
There is an ask box on every working screen. The agents answer with their sources, and can open, remind or redraft when you tell them to.
What changed overnight?
The Data agent refreshed 41 values from 7 systems; Scope 1 is final at 12,480 tCO2e. The Drafter redrafted 5 sections. I ran 1,126 comparisons and raised 4 new checks: C-07 (Scope 1 claim), C-08 (waste intensity), C-05 (headcount) and C-09 (waste comparative).
Why did the deck say 18%?
The capital markets day deck of 12 November compared 2026 Scope 1 with the 2022 base year as first reported, 15,220 tCO2e. The base year was recalculated to 14,546 tCO2e after the Tarvos divestment, but the deck was built from an older template. Against the recalculated base year the reduction is 14.2%.
Why do you think PFAS is material now?
Three signals since last year: customers raise PFAS in tenders, four of six peers report it as material, and our chemicals register shows 38 t of fluorinated substances of very high concern on one line. An EU restriction would put about €36M of coatings revenue at risk. You decide; I only propose.
What does the lender need from us by April?
A KPI certificate for 3 KPIs by 30 April: Scope 1+2 down 30.7% against a 28% target, renewable share 38.1% against 35%, and the accident rate, still in review. Meeting all three lowers the margin by 2.5 basis points.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The thresholds and rules the agents follow are settings. Only the administrator or the ESG Reporting Manager changes them, and every change is logged.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Impact materiality threshold | 3.0 of 5 | Severity score at or above which an impact is material |
| Financial materiality threshold | €25M or 1% of EBITDA | Effect at or above which a risk or opportunity is material |
| Change that triggers a question | 15% | Year-on-year change at which the Data agent asks the owner before using a value |
| Rounding tolerance | 0.5% | Differences below this are not raised as checks |
| Agent confidence for a person to look | 85% | Below this, the agent always hands to a person |
| Recalculate the base year | On, at a structural change of 3% or more | On · Off |
| Agents apply corrections below the rounding tolerance | Off | On · Off — off by default: the agents propose; people decide |
| Data request SLA | 10 working days | Reminder on day 7; escalation to the topic owner on day 12 |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution; the baseline is the fictional group's FY2025 cycle · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (IFAC, State of Play in sustainability assurance — 75% of large companies obtain some assurance; Verdantix, global corporate survey 2025, previewed in its evaluation of 21 ESG and sustainability reporting software providers — 61% of firms using commercial software in 2025, up from 29% in 2023). Context: IAASB ISSA 5000 applies to periods beginning on or after 15 December 2026. People, companies, sites and firms named on this page, including Kestrel & Vane Group and Larkspur & Moss LLP, are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
ESG Reporting is ESG reporting software that drafts your CSRD/ESRS sustainability statement and your IFRS S1/S2 climate report from one cited dataset. Seven agents propose material impacts, map the datapoints once, gather and question the data, draft each section with citations and check every figure against the accounts and past claims. Topic owners approve their sections, the Financial Controller signs agreement with the accounts and the Head of Sustainability signs the statement.
Yes. The Mapping agent derives the ESRS datapoints once and maps the same values to the IFRS S1/S2 requirements, the lender's sustainability-linked loan KPIs and the investor questionnaire. In the working solution 412 datapoints serve 88 of 96 IFRS S1/S2 requirements, all 3 lender KPIs and 131 of 142 investor questions, and a correction approved once lands in all four outputs.
The Materiality agent proposes impacts, risks and opportunities from your stakeholder survey, interviews and peer reports, scores impact and financial materiality with a confidence, and quotes the passages it used. Your thresholds decide what counts as material. The Head of Sustainability approves, edits the scores or rejects each proposal with a reason, records why a topic is not material, and signs the assessment.
The Consistency agent checks every figure in the text against the data, base-year recalculations and earlier public claims such as decks, the CEO letter and investor answers. When a reduction claim does not hold, it shows the calculation and every place the claim appears, and proposes one correction for all of them. The topic owner approves, edits or rejects it with a reason code.
Yes. Revenue denominators, headcount and other figures taken from the accounts are compared with the consolidated financial statements and their notes, and with last year's published statement. Only the Financial Controller can decide those checks, and signs that the statement agrees with the accounts before the statement can be signed.
Every number is cited, every decision carries a reason code and an e-signature, and every person and agent action is on an audit trail that exports to CSV. The Assurance agent builds an evidence pack per section from the citations and drafts answers to the assurer's questions. The assurer sees only what the ESG Reporting Manager releases, read-only.
Yes. The agents propose only: they never decide materiality, change a submitted value, apply a correction, release evidence or publish. Each check and section is decided by its named owner, a later change to a value reopens an approved section, and the statement cannot be signed until every section is approved, no check is open and the Financial Controller has signed.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your last published statement, your materiality assessment, your reporting policies and the systems your data comes from — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own statement first.
Every shipment cleared for the EU with a statement no deforested plot can reach.
1-min demoCBAM ReportingReal supplier data, not punitive defaults: a lower certificate bill, every number cited.
1-min demoESG Data Assurance ReadinessEvery figure an assurer will test, traced and fixed before fieldwork starts.
1-min demoWe'll run ESG Reporting on your last published statement, your materiality assessment and the systems your data comes from.