Climate Risk Management Software Compared: 6 Platforms Reviewed for 2026

The market for climate risk management software has expanded sharply, and so has the gap between what these tools promise and what they actually do. Most platforms produce risk scores, scenario analyses and disclosure-ready reports for frameworks including TCFD (the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures), IFRS S2 (the ISSB standard for climate-related financial disclosures) and CSRD (the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive). What most do not do is monitor your sites continuously, warn your team before a weather event arrives, or update your financial exposure as portfolios and conditions change. This article compares six leading platforms across both categories so you can match the right tool to your organisation's actual need.

What should you look for in climate risk management software?

The right platform depends on two things: what your organisation manages and what you need the outputs to do.

• Physical hazard coverage is the starting point. Any credible platform covers flood (fluvial, pluvial and coastal), extreme heat, wildfire, drought and tropical cyclones. Platforms claiming 10 or more perils should be able to confirm which hazard types are modelled at full resolution and which remain in beta. Some include perils as marketing additions before the underlying model reaches production quality.

• Financial impact translation separates the better platforms from data providers. A hazard score tells you a site is at risk. A financial impact model tells you what a 1-in-100-year event would cost at that site, in terms your finance director can act on.

• Regulatory framework alignment is mandatory for most organisations in 2026. Check whether your shortlisted vendor has been independently used in a published filing under the frameworks you report against, not just whether their website claims alignment. There is a meaningful difference between a vendor whose outputs appear in a client's TCFD report and one whose marketing materials say TCFD is supported.

• Operational depth is the criterion most buyers overlook. Most platforms deliver a periodic report. If your organisation manages physical sites, a report produced annually does not protect your assets from the flood arriving this week. Ask directly whether the platform issues site-level alerts and how those alerts reach the people who need to act on them.

• Data lineage and auditability matter because your disclosures will face external review. You need to trace every figure in your report back to its source data, scenario assumptions and methodology. Platforms that cannot demonstrate this will create problems at audit.

• Pricing in this category is almost uniformly opaque. Enterprise contracts are the norm and most vendors publish nothing publicly. Build negotiation time into your procurement timeline.

The top Climate Risk Management Software Platforms in 2026

Each platform below is reviewed on the same criteria. The tools appear in order from the most established financial-sector platforms to those built for operational use.

Transparency note: SmartResilience authored this article and is one of the six platforms reviewed. We have applied the same evaluation criteria to ourselves as to every other platform, including the limitations.

1. SmartResilience

Best for: Multi-site operators and large property portfolios that need live site-level early warnings before weather events arrive, alongside audit-ready climate disclosure for IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD or UK SRS.

SmartResilience is built for organisations that manage physical assets across multiple locations and need their climate risk data to feed operations as well as regulatory reporting. The platform combines forward-looking hazard modelling with continuous monitoring: it tracks hazard thresholds across a portfolio of sites, issues SMS and email alerts to the relevant teams before a weather event reaches a specific asset, and updates financial exposure data as portfolios and conditions change.

Sainsbury's runs SmartResilience across more than 1,000 sites and Imperial Brands deployed the platform across 50 countries and reduced the cost of climate analysis by 50%.

The platform integrates approximately 35 data sources including Ordnance Survey AddressBase UPRN data, IoT feeds, geospatial datasets and live news and social media signals. Hazard coverage includes flooding, wildfire, tropical cyclones, earthquakes, heat stress, water stress and storms. Financial exposure is quantified at site level, adaptation ROI is modelled per asset, and all outputs carry transparent data lineage so external auditors can trace every figure back to its source data and methodology.

Key capabilities:

• Live site-level alerting via SMS and email on threshold breach, confirmed independently by CIR Magazine and the Ordnance Survey case study

• Site-level financial exposure quantification translating hazard data into monetary figures per asset, updated continuously

• Adaptation ROI modelling per site, supporting investment decisions on flood defences, resilience measures and asset-level interventions

• Audit-ready regulatory outputs for IFRS S2, TCFD, CSRD, ASRS and UK SRS with transparent data lineage

• 35+ data source integrations including Ordnance Survey UPRN, IoT feeds, geospatial data, news and social media signals

Operational use: Teams receive threshold-triggered alerts at individual sites before weather events arrive, alongside operational runbooks for response. The platform also produces adaptation ROI modelling per site and the regulatory disclosure outputs required for IFRS S2, TCFD and CSRD. Outputs update continuously rather than on a fixed reporting cycle.

Limitations:

• UK-headquartered with a stronger UK case study base; international deployments exist (Imperial Brands across 50 countries) but documentation is more developed for UK operators

• The platform covers physical risk and adaptation; it does not model transition risk or nature/biodiversity risk in the way Risilience does

• Buyers should conduct direct reference checks and vendor due diligence as part of standard procurement practice

Pricing: Contact for pricing; demo available on request.

Awards: CIR Risk Management Product of the Year 2023; CIR Climate Risk Award 2025.

2. Jupiter Intelligence

Best for: Banks, asset managers, infrastructure owners and large corporates that need defensible scenario-based physical risk outputs for TCFD and CSRD disclosure.

Jupiter Intelligence's ClimateScore Global platform models nine perils including fluvial, pluvial and coastal flood, tropical cyclone wind, extreme heat, drought, wildfire, hail and subsidence, using CMIP6 data from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report downscaled to approximately 90 metres. Scenario projections run to 2100 under SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5. Clients including AstraZeneca, JLL and Spectris have independently published TCFD-aligned filings using Jupiter data. A CSRD module launched in 2024 and a generative AI layer (Jupiter AI) for conversational platform queries was added the same year.

Key capabilities:

• Asset-level hazard modelling across nine perils at approximately 90-metre resolution under three IPCC SSP scenarios

• Average Annual Loss and expected/avoided loss metrics per asset, per hazard, per decade to 2100

• Adaptation Hub (launched 2025, via Arcadis partnership) providing planning-level ROI estimates for 10+ adaptation strategies

• Independently verified TCFD outputs confirmed in published corporate filings from AstraZeneca, JLL, Spectris, Con Edison and others

• CSRD module and Jupiter AI generative query layer, both launched 2024

Operational depth: Teams use the Adaptation Hub to model the financial case for specific adaptation strategies, comparing avoided losses against intervention costs. The platform produces periodic scenario outputs and does not include real-time threshold monitoring or event-triggered site alerts.

Limitations:

• A CarbonPlan 2024 benchmark found substantial disagreement between Jupiter and XDI scores at 342 US locations; no peer-reviewed independent validation of platform output accuracy has been published

• No G2, Capterra or Gartner Peer Insights reviews for the platform are available; independent buyer feedback is thin

• Pricing is contact-only; independent estimates place full portfolio deployments at six-figure annual commitments

Pricing: Enterprise; contact only. Independent estimates place full deployments at approximately six figures annually.

3. Climate X

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.

Best for: UK and European banks, insurers and commercial real estate owners that need high-resolution physical risk outputs and integrated adaptation cost modelling for ECB, CSRD and IFRS S2 reporting.

Climate X was founded in London in 2020 and raised an $18 million Series A led by Google Ventures in 2024, bringing total funding to approximately $24.9 million. The company offers two products: Spectra for physical risk scoring and financial loss estimates, and Adapt for adaptation intervention CapEx and ROI modelling. Climate X added independently validated Fathom flood data to the platform from early 2026, following a partnership with Swiss Re-owned Fathom, whose flood models are widely cited in academic literature. Confirmed clients include CBRE, Standard Chartered, Federated Hermes, Legal & General, Virgin Money, Triodos Bank and Equans.

Key capabilities:

• Spectra: 10 to 12 perils including extreme heat, surface and riverine flood, coastal flooding, wildfire, storm surge, drought and subsidence at up to 30-metre resolution

• Adapt: adaptation intervention modelling estimating CapEx, damage prevented and ROI for specific measures at individual assets

• Fathom flood data integration (from early 2026) bringing Swiss Re-validated flood modelling into the platform

• TCFD, IFRS S2, CSRD and ECB climate guidance alignment; API, Tableau and Power BI integration available

• 5-year output intervals to 2050 and 10-year intervals to 2100 under combined CMIP5 and CMIP6 scenarios

Operational depth: None. Adapt is a planning calculator that estimates the financial case for adaptation investment at a single asset; it does not issue live alerts or integrate with operations teams. Climate X's own FAQ acknowledges that Adapt's cost assumptions are anchored to UK prices and require manual adjustment for other markets.

Limitations:

• Adapt's cost basis uses UK pricing; clients outside the UK must adjust figures manually, limiting the tool's usefulness for international portfolios without additional work

• In-house hazard models carried no peer-reviewed validation prior to the Fathom integration; the extent to which Fathom data replaces the original models is not publicly documented

• Verdantix Smart Innovators 2025 includes Climate X among approximately 20 vendors but does not award it leadership status in any published quadrant

Pricing: Enterprise; contact only. CEO Lukky Ahmed has described the platform publicly as "not the cheap solution."

4. S&P Global Climanomics

Best for: Pension funds, asset managers, REITs and large corporates already inside the S&P Capital IQ Pro or Sustainable1 ecosystem that need decade-by-decade financial loss outputs for TCFD and ISSB-aligned disclosure.

Climanomics was built by The Climate Service, acquired by S&P Global in 2022, and translates downscaled climate hazards into asset-level Modelled Average Annual Loss (MAAL) figures expressed both as a percentage of asset value and in absolute dollar terms. The platform covers nine hazards at approximately 25 km resolution using CMIP6 data under four SSP scenarios. TCFD alignment has been independently confirmed in published filings from PSP Investments (approximately C$44.75 billion in private-market assets under management), the UKGBC and SMBC/IBM Japan.

Key capabilities:

• MAAL outputs per hazard, per asset, per decade to the 2090s under SSP1-2.6, 2-4.5, 3-7.0 and 5-8.5

• 270+ asset types mapped across nine hazards via 1,200+ proprietary impact functions

• S&P Sustainable1 ecosystem integration connecting climate risk to Capital IQ Pro financial and sustainability data

• Municipal climate risk dataset covering 3,100+ US counties and 47,000+ GO bond issues, launched 2024

• Independently verified TCFD outputs in published filings from PSP Investments, Nuveen Real Estate, JBG Smith and others

Operational use: Teams access MAAL outputs via API and dashboard for portfolio-level monitoring and disclosure preparation. The platform is designed for periodic analytical workflows; it does not include real-time alerting, adaptation cost modelling or event-monitoring capabilities.

Limitations:

• 25 km resolution is too coarse for site-level engineering or operational decisions; competitors at 30-metre resolution actively position against this for asset-specific use cases

• No native adaptation ROI module; clients must apply their own discount rates to MAAL outputs, which the platform's own methodology documentation acknowledges

• Vulnerability functions are proprietary and have not been externally peer-reviewed

Pricing: Enterprise; annual subscription priced on number of assets. No public list price.

5. Risilience (Riise platform)

Best for: Large multinationals that need integrated physical, transition and nature-related risk scenario analysis with financial impact quantification for board-level strategy and regulatory disclosure.

Risilience is a spinout from the Cambridge Centre for Risk Studies and occupies a distinct position in this market. It is the only platform in this comparison that models physical risk, transition risk (carbon prices, policy changes, technology disruption) and nature/biodiversity risk within a single digital twin of a corporate's operations and value chain. The platform's flagship output is an EarningsValue@Risk (EV@R) metric quantifying the scenario-based financial impact of climate and transition events. Risilience has a strategic alliance with PwC UK, which channels the platform through PwC's sustainability practice. Verified clients include Reckitt, Burberry, Tesco, Nestlé, easyJet, Maersk, Coca-Cola Europacific Partners, Abrdn, AXA XL and Lidl GB.

Key capabilities:

• Integrated physical, transition and nature/biodiversity risk modelling in one digital twin; the only platform in this review covering all three

• TCFD, IFRS S2, CSRD/ESRS E1 and SEC scenario analysis alignment per Verdantix (2025)

• Decarbonisation-action ROI outputs for planning purposes, added in the 2025 platform release

• PwC UK alliance enabling deployment through a major professional services network

Operational use: Teams use the digital twin to run scenario planning and stress-test business continuity decisions across physical and transition risk pathways. The platform updates as client data changes and supports ongoing regulatory reporting cycles. It is not designed for real-time event monitoring or threshold-triggered alerting.

Limitations:

• Geospatial hazard resolution is weaker than physical-risk specialists such as Jupiter or Climate X; the platform's core strength is transition risk quantification, not granular site-level physical hazard data

• Digital twin deployments require months of data integration, making Risilience unsuitable for organisations that need outputs within weeks

• No independent buyer reviews on G2, Capterra or Gartner Peer Insights; no new funding round has been announced since the February 2023 Series B

Pricing: Enterprise; contact only.

6. Moody’s Climate on Demand

Best for: Re/insurers, ILS managers and large commercial-lines carriers that need insurance-grade probabilistic catastrophe modelling with a forward climate overlay.

Moody's acquired RMS in 2021 for approximately $2 billion and combined it with the Four Twenty Seven physical risk scoring business. The result is a bundle of three distinct tools: RMS probabilistic catastrophe models for insurance pricing and capital management, Climate on Demand for facility-level physical risk scoring, and HWind for near-real-time tropical cyclone wind field tracking with 6-hour updates during active storms. The platform holds FCHLPM (Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology) certification and earned the Chartis RiskTech100 top ranking for four consecutive years from 2023 to 2026.

Key capabilities:

• 400+ probabilistic catastrophe model including FCHLPM-certified NA Hurricane v25, validated against $75 billion of policy-level loss data

• HWind real-time hurricane tracking with 6-hour updates during active storms, integrated into ExposureIQ for insurer event response workflows

• Climate on Demand facility-level scores for flood, heat, hurricane, sea-level rise, water stress and wildfire under IPCC RCP scenarios

• Annualised Damage Rate per $1,000 asset value for corporate portfolio screening under climate scenarios

• Open Modeling Engine (launched June 2024) enabling third-party Oasis-based models including Fathom and JBA to run within the platform

Operational use: Re/insurers use HWind and ExposureIQ together for active storm event response, with wind field data updating every six hours during a named storm. Corporate clients use Climate on Demand for portfolio scoring and disclosure preparation; this side of the platform produces periodic outputs without real-time alerting.

Limitations:

• The platform is designed for insurance pricing and capital adequacy; applying it to corporate site-level adaptation planning requires significant additional interpretation beyond what the standard offering provides

• Major model version updates (v11, v23, v25) have historically produced industry-wide loss estimate shifts, creating volatility for clients benchmarking exposure across versions

• Verdantix (2024) places Moody's outside the Leaders' Quadrant in Climate Financial Data and Analytics for non-insurance corporate use cases

Pricing: Enterprise; mid-six to low-seven figures annually for full RMS deployments. Climate on Demand for corporate portfolios is estimated in the high five to six figures depending on portfolio size.

type: embedded-entry-inline id: 7avmVO7hTNb1o1mfM8kY6F

How do you choose the right climate risk software for your organisation?

The most useful question is not which platform scores highest overall, but which platform type matches your primary need. Five questions narrow the field.

1. Do you manage financial portfolios or physical sites? Banks, pension funds, insurers and asset managers need scenario-based financial loss outputs for capital planning and regulatory disclosure. Jupiter, Climanomics and Moody's are built for these buyers. If your organisation manages physical sites, retail stores, logistics hubs, industrial facilities or commercial property, you need site-level data that connects directly to your operations.

2. Do you need continuous monitoring or periodic reporting? All six platforms in this review produce disclosure-ready outputs to varying degrees. If your primary need is TCFD or CSRD compliance and a periodic reporting cycle suits your workflow, the five assessment-focused platforms each serve that function. If you need the platform to monitor assets between reporting cycles and alert teams before events arrive, SmartResilience is the only platform in this comparison designed for that.

3. Do you carry significant transition risk exposure alongside physical risk? If your organisation faces material exposure to carbon pricing, policy change or technology disruption in addition to physical hazards, Risilience is the only platform in this comparison that models all three in a single digital twin.

4. Which regulatory frameworks apply to you? TCFD, IFRS S2 and CSRD are covered to varying degrees by every platform here. If your reporting obligations include ASRS or UK SRS, the field narrows significantly. Verify coverage for your specific framework with any vendor you shortlist, and ask to see an example output from a live filing.

5. What level of data auditability do you require? If your disclosures will face external assurance, you need to trace every figure back to its source. Ask each vendor to walk through data lineage for a specific site before you sign a contract.

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.

Request demo →

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.

Frequently asked questions about climate risk management software

What is climate risk management software? Climate risk management software helps organisations identify, quantify and respond to the financial risks from physical climate events including flooding, extreme heat, wildfire, drought and storms. Platforms range from scenario analysis tools producing regulatory disclosure outputs to systems that monitor assets continuously and issue warnings before weather events occur.

What is the difference between physical risk and transition risk? Physical risk covers direct financial losses from climate events: flood damage, heat-related disruption, wind damage and water stress affecting operations. Transition risk covers financial losses from the shift to a low-carbon economy: carbon pricing, regulatory change, technology disruption and shifting market conditions. Most platforms in this review focus on physical risk. Risilience is the only one in this comparison that models both in a single tool.

How does climate risk software support TCFD and IFRS S2 disclosure? TCFD and IFRS S2 both require organisations to assess and disclose the financial impact of climate risks under multiple warming scenarios. Climate risk software produces the scenario-based hazard and financial loss data needed to populate those disclosures. Platforms with transparent data lineage allow external auditors to verify the figures, which third-party assurance frameworks require in 2026.

What is the difference between a climate risk assessment and an early warning system? A climate risk assessment identifies which sites are exposed to which hazards and estimates the financial consequences of a modelled event. An early warning system monitors those sites continuously and notifies your team before a specific event arrives. Most platforms in this review produce assessments on a periodic basis. SmartResilience produces both: disclosure-ready assessment outputs and threshold-triggered site alerts.

Can climate risk software model the ROI of adaptation measures? Yes, but with significant variation in approach. Jupiter Intelligence's Adaptation Hub and Climate X's Adapt both estimate the financial case for specific adaptation interventions. Jupiter's tool uses scenario-based avoided-loss estimates at a planning level. Climate X's Adapt estimates CapEx and damage prevented per asset using UK-anchored cost assumptions that require manual adjustment for other markets. SmartResilience models adaptation ROI per site connected to the live operational and financial data the platform already holds for that asset.