Organisations that have completed a climate assessment under TCFD or CSRD commonly discover the same gap: the report meets the disclosure requirement but does not tell a site manager what to do when a weather alert arrives. The tools that close this gap and those that produce the report are not the same product, and most comparison articles treat them as if they are. This review covers six commercial climate risk management platforms to give sustainability and compliance teams a reliable basis for shortlisting.
What is climate risk management software?
Climate risk management software identifies, quantifies and monitors an organisation’s exposure to physical climate hazards, including flooding, wildfire, heat stress and extreme storms, as well as transition risks arising from regulatory and market shifts.
The category contains two meaningfully different product types. Assessment tools produce periodic, scenario-based reports that feed into regulatory disclosure frameworks. Operational platforms do this and go further: they quantify financial exposure in monetary terms at individual site level, model adaptation return on investment and, in some cases, issue real-time alerts before a weather event reaches an asset.
This distinction matters more in 2026 than in prior years. IFRS S2 (International Financial Reporting Standards S2), published by the ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board), is in its first mandatory reporting year for many large organisations. UK SRS (UK Sustainability Reporting Standards) is live, ASRS (Australia’s Sustainability Reporting Standards) is finalised and CSRD (the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) continues its phased rollout.
TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) was disbanded in October 2023 and absorbed into IFRS S1/S2. Platform selection now carries direct regulatory consequences: outputs that will satisfy external audit require more than qualitative scenario narratives.
A separate and commonly conflated category includes carbon accounting tools, GRC (governance, risk and compliance) platforms and qualitative TCFD narrative generators. These are not covered here.
The top Climate Risk Management Software Platforms in 2026
SmartResilience
UK-based physical risk and early warning platform for multi-site asset portfolios.
SmartResilience positions as the platform that moves climate risk from a report into a live operational system. It focuses on multi-site operators in food retail, logistics, healthcare and property, and is designed to serve both compliance teams producing regulatory disclosures and operations teams managing exposure in real time. Public clients include Sainsbury’s, Imperial Brands, Bupa and The Crown Estate.
Note: SmartResilience authored this article and is one of the platforms reviewed. We have done our best to assess all six fairly. We include ourselves because we believe our platform is the best fit for organizations searching not only for comprehensive climate risk assessments for regulatory disclosure and real-time operational protection.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD, ASRS, UK SRS
Pros:
Confirmed real-time alerting: 24/7 hazard monitoring triggers SMS and email alerts when risk crosses pre-agreed thresholds; the only confirmed capability of this type across the six platforms reviewed here
Multi-award winner for the most innovative climate technology.
Named client outcomes: Sainsbury’s received a flood warning 12 hours before an event and 7 hours before the Environment Agency alert across 1,000+ sites, avoiding £3m in damage at a single location; Imperial Brands cut climate analysis costs by 50% across 50 countries
Cons:
Scenario methodology not publicly documented at the level most RFPs require; CMIP (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) version and downscaling approach are not stated on public pages
No independent analyst coverage from Verdantix, Gartner or Forrester found as of May 2026
Why we picked it: The only platform in this review with confirmed real-time operational alerting and confirmed coverage of all five major 2026 disclosure frameworks.
Who it’s for: Asset-heavy organisations in food manufacturing, retail, logistics, healthcare and property that need both operational alerting and regulatory reporting from a single platform.
Pricing: Not publicly available. Free demo offered.
Jupiter Intelligence
Physical climate risk analytics for financial institutions and large global corporates.
Jupiter Intelligence, founded in 2017 and headquartered in San Francisco, positions as the scientific backbone for enterprise climate risk programmes. It targets banks, insurers and large corporates that need peer-reviewable physical hazard data for regulatory submissions, credit risk integration and portfolio-level scenario analysis. Named clients include AstraZeneca, BP, Zurich Insurance and the US Department of Defense.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD
Pros:
Deepest analyst recognition in this comparison: Verdantix Smart Innovators and 2024 UNEP FI Climate Risk Landscape inclusion
90-metre spatial resolution via CMIP6 ensemble modelling and statistical downscaling, with custom projects reaching 1 to 3 metres; 9 modelled perils to 2100 in 5-year increments
Named clients include AstraZeneca, BP, Zurich Insurance and the US Department of Defense
Cons:
Real-time alerting unconfirmed: older products referenced current-hour forecasts; current platform emphasises long-horizon projections
Headcount declined from approximately 94 to 83 between 2024 and early 2026; no public explanation found
Pricing reported at $25,000 to multi-million per year (CEO-stated, 2022); no current pricing publicly available, and contract scale favours large global enterprises over mid-market buyers
Why we picked it: The most analyst-covered commercial physical risk platform in this comparison, with the widest enterprise client base across financial services and global corporates.
Who it’s for: Banks, asset managers, insurers and large global corporates needing enterprise-grade physical hazard data with regulatory scenario alignment.
Pricing: $25,000 to multi-million dollar annual contracts (CEO-reported, 2022). Current pricing not public.
Climate X
Asset-level physical risk platform for financial services, with Fathom flood data integration from 2026.
Climate X, founded in 2020 and backed by Google Ventures ($18M Series A in 2024), positions as a financial-services-native physical risk platform. It targets banks, mortgage lenders and real estate investors integrating climate risk into credit origination, loan book assessment and regulatory reporting. It holds ISO 27001 and B Corp certification and counts CBRE, Virgin Money, Triodos Bank and Legal and General among its named clients.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD
Pros:
$18M Series A led by Google Ventures (June 2024); CMIP5 and CMIP6 scenarios across eight warming pathways, aligned to NGFS (Network for Greening the Financial System) guidance; ISO 27001 and B Corp certified
Fathom (Swiss Re) flood integration available from early 2026, adding Swiss Re flood data depth to the Spectra platform
Named clients include CBRE, Triodos Bank, Virgin Money and Legal & General, with independently attributed testimonials
Cons:
Real-time alerting unconfirmed
Hazard count stated inconsistently across vendor materials (cited as 11, 12 or 16 depending on source)
Transition risk modelling not confirmed as a platform capability; the focus is physical hazard scoring for credit and reporting workflows
Why we picked it: Strong financial-services traction with named blue-chip clients and one of the more transparent scenario methodologies in this comparison.
Who it’s for: Banks, mortgage lenders, real estate investors and financial institutions integrating physical risk into credit, origination and regulatory reporting workflows.
Pricing: Not publicly available.
Mitiga Solutions / EarthScan
Physics-grade climate risk modelling built on supercomputing infrastructure.
Mitiga Solutions, founded in 2016 and based in Barcelona, positions on scientific depth above all else. Its SaaS product EarthScan makes that methodology accessible via API and a self-serve interface, available on both Microsoft Azure and AWS Marketplaces. Mitiga targets insurers, infrastructure investors and corporate sustainability teams that need peer-reviewable physical risk outputs, with over 40% of staff holding PhDs and a free trial available on EarthScan Pro.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD, ESRS E1 (CSRD’s climate-specific reporting standard), AASB S2 (Australia), California SB 261
Pros:
Proprietary “Signals Engine” combining CMIP6, CORDEX (Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment), Bayesian inference and bias correction at approximately 90-metre resolution across 180+ countries; over 40% of staff hold PhDs
Most explicit multi-jurisdiction regulatory automation in this comparison: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD/ESRS E1, AASB S2 and California SB 261 all confirmed
Available on Microsoft Azure and AWS Marketplaces; free trial of EarthScan Pro available
Cons:
EarthScan API currently limited to one asset and one signal per call, scaling only via scripting (vendor-disclosed limitation)
Smaller commercial footprint in financial services than Climate X, with fewer named institutional clients publicly confirmed
No confirmed real-time alerting; outputs are periodic assessments rather than live hazard monitoring
Why we picked it: The most thoroughly documented scientific methodology in this comparison and the only platform with explicitly confirmed AASB S2 coverage for Australian reporters.
Who it’s for: Insurers, infrastructure investors and corporate sustainability teams with sophisticated disclosure requirements that need peer-reviewable physical risk outputs.
Pricing: Not publicly available. Available via existing cloud commit draw-down on Azure and AWS.
Risilience (Riise platform)
Integrated physical and transition risk platform for large corporates, with nature risk coverage.
Risilience, spun out of Cambridge University and based in Cambridge, UK, positions as the platform for large multinationals that need physical risk, transition risk and nature risk quantified in a single financial framework. Its primary output is Earnings Value-at-Risk (EV@Risk), designed to give boards and investors a single financially quantified view of climate exposure. Verdantix has named it market-leading in both physical and climate risk digital solutions categories.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: TCFD, CSRD, IFRS S2 (partial, via TCFD alignment)
Pros:
Two Verdantix “market-leading” designations across both Smart Innovators: Physical Climate Risk Solutions and Climate Risk Digital Solutions reports
Earnings Value-at-Risk (EV@Risk) as the primary financial output, a financially quantified metric designed for board and investor audiences
Named clients confirmed in independently published annual reports: Nestlé, Reckitt, Coca-Cola Europacific Partners, Burberry and Barclays
Cons:
IPCC/NGFS scenario set not fully enumerated on public pages, a material transparency gap for RFP scrutiny
No independently attributed financial case studies found; named clients appear in their own annual reports, but financial outcomes attributable to Risilience are not publicly confirmed
Engagement model is consultancy-led; self-serve assessment or free trial not available
Why we picked it: The only platform in this comparison designed for integrated physical and transition risk in a single financial-quantification framework, with the strongest independently verified client base among large multinationals.
Who it’s for: FTSE 100 and Fortune 500 companies needing financially quantified climate and nature risk for strategic planning, investor disclosure and regulatory reporting.
Pricing: Not publicly available.
Moody’s Climate on Demand
Physical hazard scoring integrated into Moody’s credit and risk analytics stack.
Moody’s Climate on Demand is part of Moody’s Corporation’s broader analytics infrastructure, not a standalone climate platform. It positions as the regulator-trusted physical risk layer for financial institutions that already operate within the Moody’s ecosystem, scoring six climate perils plus earthquake at any location globally and integrating with Moody’s credit, ESG and risk analytics. The European Central Bank, Bank of England and Banque de France are cited as users.
Regulatory frameworks confirmed: IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD
Pros:
Top-ranked across Chartis RiskTech100 2024 and 2025 (10 categories including Climate Risk); number one in Chartis Physical and Infrastructure Risk50 (2025)
Regulator-trusted methodology: the European Central Bank, Bank of England and Banque de France are cited as users
Scores 6 climate perils plus earthquake at any latitude/longitude globally, integrated with Moody’s credit and ESG analytics
Cons:
Real-time alerting not a primary feature: the platform is scenario and scoring-oriented
Transition risk is covered separately via Moody’s Climate Pathways, not within Climate on Demand
Only available via Moody’s Intelligent Risk Platform tenancy; not sold as a standalone product, creating a dependency on the broader Moody’s stack
Why we picked it: The deepest incumbent regulator relationships in this comparison and the strongest integration with enterprise credit and risk workflows.
Who it’s for: Financial institutions, banks, insurers and asset managers that need regulator-trusted physical risk scores alongside existing Moody’s analytics infrastructure.
Pricing: Sold via Moody’s Intelligent Risk Platform tenancies. Not publicly available.
Full comparison table
What separates an assessment tool from an operational platform?
Assessment tools generate periodic scenario-based hazard scores and disclosure reports. An operational platform converts hazard exposure into financial figures at individual site level, models the cost and return on investment of adaptation measures and, in some cases, issues alerts before a weather event arrives.
The difference in outcome is measurable. When Sainsbury’s received a site-specific flood warning 12 hours before an event, store teams moved stock, closed access routes and deployed flood defences before the Environment Agency had issued its own alert. The result was an estimated £3m saving from a single location. That outcome requires real-time alerting integrated with pre-planned operational protocols, not a periodic risk report. The Sainsbury’s example is relevant here not as a vendor claim but as an illustration of what the operational category produces that the assessment category does not.
Key takeaway: A disclosure report and an operational early warning are different outputs. Most platforms in this comparison produce one. One produces both.
type: embedded-entry-inline id: 7avmVO7hTNb1o1mfM8kY6F
How do you choose the right climate risk platform for your organisation?
The right platform follows from three questions answered before shortlisting.
1. Is your primary need regulatory disclosure, operational site protection, or both? If disclosure is the primary output, several platforms in this comparison will fit. If operational alerting is also required, confirmed capabilities narrow the field significantly based on the comparison above.
2. Does your portfolio require site-level financial granularity or portfolio-level averages? Portfolio-level screening suits organisations triaging a large estate into risk bands. Site-level financial quantification, expressed as monetary loss figures per location, suits organisations allocating adaptation budgets or presenting financial impact to a finance team or board.
3. Do your outputs need to satisfy a finance team, a sustainability reporting team, or both? Risilience produces Earnings Value-at-Risk, designed for investor and board audiences. Moody’s Climate on Demand integrates with credit analytics for financial institutions. SmartResilience produces both regulatory disclosure outputs and operational financial metrics for site-level decisions.
Before shortlisting, ask every vendor to specify which CMIP scenario version they use, how often hazard data is updated and whether methodology has been independently reviewed. A 2024 CarbonPlan study found weak rank correlation between different vendors’ scores for the same addresses. The choice of platform materially changes the risk picture your organisation receives.
SmartResilience is the platform in this comparison designed for organisations that need regulatory disclosure and operational protection from a single product. For asset portfolios with complex multi-site exposure and reporting obligations under IFRS S2, UK SRS or ASRS, it is the only reviewed platform that confirms real-time alerting, site-level financial quantification and full framework coverage in combination.
Choosing the right platform comes down to matching its confirmed capabilities to your regulatory obligations, your portfolio structure and the level of operational protection your sites require before the next weather event or disclosure deadline.
