GRESB SCORE UP 20 POINTS. REPORTING TIME DOWN 93%.

Posted on: September 24, 2025

ESG
Reporting
GRESB

GRESB Score Up 20 Points.
Reporting Time Down 93%.

Better data did not just improve the submission. It changed what the team could see all year round.

GRESB score improved by 20 points through better utility data and reporting

Scenario

Gary leads ESG reporting for a UK property fund with 25 assets across the UK and Europe. Every year, GRESB season meant the same thing: weeks of chasing utility data from site teams, reconciling mismatched formats, and submitting figures he could not fully stand behind.

Coverage gaps across the Energy, GHG, and Data Monitoring indicators were costing points. Not because the assets were underperforming, but because the evidence base was incomplete.

What the data showed

Once connected to Monitor Hut, live consumption data flowed continuously across all 25 sites. Electricity, gas, and water were tracked at half hourly intervals with automated validation.

By the time the GRESB submission window opened, eleven months of clean, auditable data already existed. Key platform metrics at submission:

Metric Detail
Sites with full utility coverage 25
Utility types tracked continuously 3 (electricity, gas, water)
GRESB indicators directly informed 10+
Estimated figures in submission 0
Data collection method Half hourly, automated

Resolution

With a verified data foundation in place, Gary’s team moved from data collection to data review. Anomalies flagged during the year had already been investigated and resolved before submission opened. They did not surface as last minute problems.

Reporting preparation time dropped from three weeks to two days.

The result
  Before After
Reporting time 3 weeks 2 days
Estimated data points Multiple 0
GRESB score movement Baseline +20 points
Coverage gaps Several None

Up to 49 points on the GRESB scorecard are directly influenced by the quality and completeness of energy consumption data. Underperforming GRESB scores are often a data problem rather than an asset performance problem. When consumption data is continuous, validated, and audit ready all year round, the submission becomes a formality rather than a fire drill.