Your rating is built largely from what you already publish.
ESG ratings like MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P assess your company based on publicly available information. We compare what raters expect against what they actually find on you. You get a list of gaps with the exact source and concrete options to improve, not a generic action plan.
The problem
Every provider scores by its own methodology. Even from the same underlying data the results can diverge: a good rating with one provider does not automatically mean a good rating with the next.
Keeping track of detailed requirements and complex methodologies across every rating ties up enormous resources.
Why this matters now.
Three places where a rating result has a concrete effect, whether or not you take part in the process.
Capital and financing terms
Investors and banks use ESG ratings for screening. What is written there affects your access and your terms, even if you have never spoken to the provider.
Tenders and supply chain
Customers and buyers ask for rating results in tenders and supplier assessments. A weak result costs you conversations before they start.
Management and supervisory board
As soon as your score drops or falls behind your competitors, the topic reaches the board. Then you need an explanation that holds up.
Four reasons rating work is such a grind.
Everyone scores differently
Methodology, weighting and peer group differ by provider. Two ratings of your company can move in opposite directions without anything changing internally.
With MSCI, Sustainalytics and others you are rated automatically
You never sign up. The questionnaire is effectively completed by the providers themselves, based on what is publicly available. Depending on the rating, all you can do afterwards is review or supply additional information, and an appeal often ties up more resources than it returns.
With CDP the effort sits in filling it in
The questionnaire is extensive, your evidence is scattered, and the whole thing repeats every year with the same internal legwork.
The view of the shared levers is missing
Many requirements repeat across providers. Once you know which measure counts in several ratings at once, you work on the points with the greatest leverage instead of on each rating separately.
We collect what is publicly available about you
Sustainability report, policies, website, annual report and other open sources. Exactly the basis the raters work from.
We compare it against the rating requirements
We check which topics are expected and which of them are findable and creditable in your case.
You get the gap per requirement, with the exact source
For each requirement you see where the information sits today, for example in the sustainability report or the code of conduct, or that it is missing and which document it belongs in. No generic recommendation list.
We show you what else you should disclose
Which information is missing and in what wording it needs to appear so raters find and credit it going forward.
Get your gap analysis.
20 minutes, one concrete example from your own disclosure, and you know where the biggest gaps are.
Use-Cases
All the major ESG ratings are covered
Focus
MSCI
Scoring runs automatically, based on what you publish: sustainability report, code of conduct, policies, website. We show you which expected topics the raters do not find there.
Focus
Sustainalytics
Same mechanism, different emphasis. We compare what is expected for your risk profile against what is actually evidenced in your documents, from policy to sustainability report.
Focus
CDP
The effort sits in filling it in and repeats every year. How Glacier AI populates the submission from your existing documents is shown on the CDP page.
Also covered
Others (S&P, LSEG, ISS ESG)
We cover these ratings as well. If one of them matters to you, get in touch and we will look at it together.
Trusted by leaders
The ROXCEL Group works with Glacier AI both in the context of EcoVadis and for ESRS reporting. We find it particularly helpful that the solution brings a lot of structure to complex topics, thereby saving us a significant amount of time. At the same time, Glacier AI encourages us to consider relevant aspects that are otherwise easily overlooked. Especially when it comes to ESRS reporting, we appreciate the clearly structured process, the efficient text generation, and the dedicated and reliable support from the Glacier team. Overall, we feel we are in good hands.
See what the raters do not find on you.
20 minutes, one concrete example from your own disclosure, and you know where the biggest gaps are.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about ESG ratings
An ESG rating is an external provider's assessment of a company on environmental, social and governance criteria. The result is used above all by investors, banks and business partners. The best known providers in the DACH region are MSCI, Sustainalytics and CDP, followed by S&P, LSEG and ISS ESG.