The 2025 CDP Rating: What Matters to Companies Today

CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) is the world’s leading standard through which companies disclose environmental information on climate change, water, and forests. Investors, banks, customers, and supply chain partners use CDP scores to assess the transparency, maturity, and credibility of ESG management. The better the score, the easier it is to access capital, win tenders, and secure supplier approvals —and the stronger the competitive position within the ESG ecosystem.

Time is a critical factor here: For the 2025 cycle, the deadline for submitting CDP responses is September 18, 2025. The platform opens in the spring, at which point companies receive their questionnaires and begin completing them. In the fall, CDP will analyze the data and publish the results in the fourth quarter —including the well-known A-List. CDP (formerly: Carbon Disclosure Project) is the world’s leading standard through which companies disclose environmental information on climate change, water, and forests. Investors, banks, customers, and supply chain partners use CDP scores to assess the transparency, maturity, and credibility of ESG management. The better the score, the easier it is to access capital, win tenders, and secure supplier approvals—and the stronger the competitive position within the ESG ecosystem.

‍

For companies, this means that the actual work must begin well before the deadline. Only those who prepare their processes, data, and responsibilities in a timely manner will be able to submit a complete and consistent response during the processing phase—and thus secure the opportunity for a better score.

An Overview of the CDP Scoring Methodology

The CDP Scoring Methodology forms the foundation upon which companies are assessed in the annual CDP questionnaire. The goal is not only to create transparency but also to highlight the level of maturity in addressing climate risks, opportunities, and governance. The methodology follows a clear tiered model—from Disclosure through Awareness and Management to Leadership. These four assessment tiers help companies measure their own progress in the CDP sustainability rating and systematically improve it. Those who understand the logic of the methodology can focus their efforts on the key areas that are crucial for achieving a better score.

The four rating levels

CDP evaluates each relevant question across four maturity levels:

• Disclosure – Completeness of Disclosure
• Awareness – Understanding Environmental and Business Risks
• Management – Established Processes and Measures
• Leadership – Demonstrating Best Practices and Integrating Them into Strategy and Financial Planning
  

These stages build on one another: without full disclosure, there is no awareness; without awareness, there is no management; without management, there is no leadership.

Essential Criteria – the mandatory requirements

A key, often underestimated element of the CDP scoring methodology is what are known as the Essential Criteria (EC). These “mandatory requirements” determine whether a company can advance to a higher level at all—for example, from Awareness to Management or from Management to Leadership. In other words: Even if a company scores highly on the CDP questionnaire, a single unmet Essential Criterion blocks the path to a better CDP sustainability rating. Typical examples include demonstrating a formalized process for identifying and managing climate risks (Question 2.2.2) or the requirement to disclose at least one complete set of risks and one set of opportunities. Companies that do not keep the Essential Criteria in mind from the outset often get stuck in the middle of the pack—even if their substantive responses are solid. Therefore, it is crucial to view ECs as a kind of “level key” and to work through them consistently.

How does the scoring of individual questions work?

Many CDP questions—such as those regarding risks or opportunities—are table-based. The logic is simple but crucial:

• Points are awarded for each “completely filled-in row.”
• “Complete” means: All required fields in this row have been filled out (e.g., description, driver, time horizon, impact, probability).
• If a company has only two significant risks, it can list just two—and will then receive points for those two. There is no need to invent fictitious risks.
• The maximum score is determined by the number of points allocated per line. If you complete fewer lines, you will earn fewer points—which is perfectly acceptable, as long as the information provided is consistent and of high quality.
  

Important: “Unknown” entries in required fields (e.g., probability, magnitude) are not considered complete and will result in a point deduction. As a general rule, points are awarded for each fully completed row. Avoid making up risks—it’s better to have fewer rows that are reliable.

Explanation using a practical example: Question 3.1.1 “Details on environmental risks and opportunities”

To make the abstract logic of the CDP scoring methodology more tangible, it is worth taking a look at a specific question from the CDP questionnaire. Question 3.1.1—“Provide details of the environmental risks…”— is one of the most important score drivers because it requires climate risks to be systematically described, quantified, and linked to processes. This question illustrates how companies can earn points across the various levels—from Disclosure to CDP Disclosure Leadership.

At the same time, this example illustrates why many organizations fall short in this area: incomplete entries, “Unknown” entries for probability or magnitude, and a lack of financial quantification. However, with a structured approach, section 3.1.1 can be turned into a strategic lever—not only for a better CDP sustainability rating, but also for aligning risk management with corporate strategy.

Disclosure (Basic)

• Each risk is entered on a separate line.
• Required fields: Description, Driver, Affected business unit, Time horizon, Impact.
• Points: for each fully completed line.
  

Awareness

• In addition, the probability and magnitude must be specified (≠ Unknown).
• Only then is the risk assessment considered "deliberate."
  

Management

• Prerequisite: Completion of the Awareness course.
• Organizations must demonstrate that the risk management process (2.2.2) is effective.
• In addition: a financial quantification of the risk (e.g., a range of amounts in euros over a given time horizon) and an indication of the costs of the response.
  

Leadership

• This is achieved when a position is fully staffed at the management level.
• This is where leadership really stands out: There is no single, isolated factor—only companies that truly quantify the financial impact and establish the strategic connection achieve this highest level of maturity.

Frequently Missing Data – and How Best Practices Can Help Ensure Its Availability

• Financial impacts: Often described only vaguely (“material”) rather than quantified. Best practice: Provide euro ranges for each time horizon.
• Costs of the response: Often overlooked. Solution: Action plans with CapEx/OpEx breakdowns.
• Process reference: Without a clear checkmark in 2.2.2 (“Risks”), no management points are awarded for 3.1.1.
• Strategic context: For leadership, the risk must be clearly linked to strategy or financial planning.

Updates for the 2025 CDP Cycle

The questionnaire remains largely unchanged, though with some significant tightening:

• External verification: Scope 1 and 2 emissions must be verified by a third party.
• Scope 3: At least 70% externally verified to qualify for the A-List.
• Fine-tuning: Minor linguistic adjustments, additional selection options (e.g., multi-select in forest modules), and more precise guidance for scenario analysis and plastics.
  

For companies, this means that climate data must be verifiable and reliable —self-reported data alone is no longer sufficient.

Conclusion: Achieving Leadership – Through Targeted Coaching

The CDP Scoring Methodology makes it clear: points are not awarded for statements of intent, but for complete disclosures, reliable figures, and verifiable processes. The leadership points, in particular, separate the wheat from the chaff—they reward companies that financially assess climate risks and opportunities and embed them strategically. With the new verification requirements set to take effect in 2025, the importance of sound data management and governance will also increase significantly.

Five Glaciers Consulting: Your Partner for CDP Excellence

We guide you through every step—from gap analysis and disclosure templates to quantitative assessment and mock scoring. Our services include:

• Gap Analysis & Pre-Scoring: Identifying Essential Criteria and Weaknesses
• Data Design & Governance: Disclosure Templates, KPI Logic, Audit Trail
• Quantification & Measures: Financial Impacts, Response Costs, Scenario Analyses
• Mock Scoring & Quality Assurance: Ensuring that all level criteria are met before submission
  

The countdown is on—make the most of the time you have left. Even a few targeted coaching sessions over the next few weeks can make all the difference. Contact us for a no-obligation initial consultation—and take the step toward leadership status.