How do I compare climate risk data providers?

When comparing climate risk data providers, start with three high-level categories of consideration.

1. Scope: What does the data cover? Consider the three following sub-categories:
   
   1. Geospatial coverage: Does the data cover the area/region in which I am interested?
      Munich Re’s data has global coverage.
   2. Timeframe: What timeframes does the data cover?
      Munich Re reports data across 3 timeframes (present, 2050, 2100).
   3. Risk Factors: What risk factors are covered by the data?
      Munich Re has one of the most expansive ranges of risk factors, covering 14 different hazards/stresses.
      
2. Output: On what is the data providing information, and in what format?
   
   On the GRESB Climate Risk Platform, Munich Re provides data on Hazard and Exposure, and generally expresses these in terms of return periods. Other data providers might go further and include information on Vulnerability to arrive at estimations of Financial Impact. When evaluating these options, it is important to understand the extent of the assumptions that have to be made in order to make such calculations to ensure that those assumptions are appropriate to your purpose.
   
3. Methodology: What underlying datasets are used? How are they combined? Do they show an appreciation for varying levels of risk tolerance? etc.
   
   This can only be understood upon careful study of the methodology of each provider. Ask for documentation. Understand how their scores use relative scoring vs. absolute scoring. Does their combination of forward-looking models smooth out potential weather extremes in which your firm is interested? Etc.
   Upon purchase of data from the Climate Risk Platform, Munich Re provides detailed accounts of the underlying indicators for each of its risk factors and how those sub-indicators are combined and built up into the risk factor indices. Additionally, if such documentation is required, you will be provided an avenue through which Munich Re will be able to provide additional insight.

In the end, it is up to the consumer given their needs around scope, output, and methodology. We’ve found Munich Re to be a good provider to host on our platform because 1. they have an extensive scope that is one of the best, 2. we’ve focused on providing very robust hazard/exposure scores as opposed to very loose financial outputs, and 3. a deep dive into their methodologies has demonstrated a high degree of proficiency and respect for the underlying science.