Would your transition plan withstand review?
The anchor for transition plans has moved from voluntary alliances to supervisors and standard-setters. Score 25 questions in about 15 minutes and see whether your targets, pathways, capital, engagement and evidence actually connect. Your result is your weakest link, not your average.
Twenty-five questions, five links
Rate each question from 0 to 3, ideally with strategy, risk and the front line together. Diverging scores between functions are themselves a finding.
Your weakest link, instantly
Your score on every link, the link a supervisor or investor would read first, and the priority move.
Recommendations by email
An action for every weak question, a joint test between links, your red flags with fixes, and a recommended starting point.
Which best describes your institution?
Answer for the plan as it stands today: your published plan, or the one in preparation if none is published yet.
Your answers stay in your browser until you choose to send them.
Are your targets anchored, scoped and owned?
Targets reference a recognised pathway with stated base year and scope.
Interim milestones exist within the current planning horizon, not only a 2050 end point.
Scope covers the material portfolio (financed, insured or invested emissions), not only operations.
Any use of offsets or removals is bounded, disclosed and quality-screened.
Targets have board ownership with consequences (remuneration, strategy gates).
Do sector pathways connect targets to your portfolio?
Sector pathways are defined for material high-emitting exposures.
Pathways use recognised scenario sources with vintage and region stated.
Baselines are measured with a disclosed methodology (e.g., PCAF) and data-quality scores.
Pathways are reconciled with clients’ realistic technology and investment plans.
The gap between current trajectory and pathway is quantified and reported internally.
Does the plan move capital?
Financing, underwriting or investment strategies are derived from the sector pathways.
‘Transition finance’ is defined tightly enough to withstand challenge.
New business in high-emitting sectors references pathway alignment, with documented outcomes.
Products exist that finance transition, not only already-green assets.
Shifts in capital allocation are measurable year on year.
Does engagement change the real economy?
Client or investee engagement has objectives, timelines and escalation steps.
Engagement targets the largest contributors to financed emissions.
Relationship teams are trained and incentivised to hold transition conversations.
Escalation has happened: there are cases where terms changed or business was declined.
Outcomes are tracked as real-economy change, not meeting counts.
Can an outsider verify your progress?
Progress against each public commitment is measured and disclosed on a fixed cadence.
Methodologies are documented well enough for an external reviewer to re-perform them.
Marketing and client-facing claims are checked against the evidence base.
Restatements and target changes are disclosed with reasons.
Internal audit or an independent reviewer has examined the plan’s data and claims.
Which of these would a reviewer find in your plan today?
Optional. Tick any that apply. These are the ten red flags external reviewers look for first.
Download your results and recommendations
- An action for every question below “Established”, ordered by link
- A joint test: where one link fails to drive the next
- Your red flags, each with the fix reviewers expect
- What applies to your institution type, and a recommended starting point
Thank you. We have your results and will email your report, with a link to pay, within one working day.
Review your results with a senior practitioner
A 30-minute call to compare your results with supervisory expectations. We will tell you which starting point fits, or whether you need outside support at all.
Book a callWhat the Five-Link Credibility Chain adds to the standards you already follow
- IFRS S2 and the IFRS Foundation transition plan guidance (2025), building on the TPT Disclosure Framework, define what a disclosure contains; the chain tests whether disclosed elements connect.
- EBA ESG risk guidelines require prudential plans under CRD VI Art. 76(2); Links 2 and 3 test the pathway-to-capital evidence a supervisor can follow.
- Target-setting guidance (NZBA guidance, the SBTi financial institutions standard, the NZAOA protocol) and PCAF define scope and measurement; Links 1 and 2 check them independently of any alliance membership.
- FINMA Circular 2026/1 and the Swiss climate disclosure ordinance set Swiss expectations; the chain checks consistency between claims, strategy and risk processes.
Edition November 2026. Self-assessed results are general guidance, not regulatory, legal or investment advice. Regulatory references reflect the status known to Artamis in November 2026; confirm current requirements for your jurisdiction and entities. This test is not assurance and not a legal opinion on greenwashing exposure. Artamis does not certify targets; validation bodies such as SBTi do.
Prefer to talk it through first?
Bring your results, or your questions, to a 30-minute conversation. We will tell you where to start.