Crédit Agricole sustainability score: 32/100
Crédit Agricole is a French cooperative banking group headquartered in Montrouge. Its listed arm, Crédit Agricole S.A., is the central body of 39 regional banks and owns LCL, the asset manager Amundi and the insurer Crédit Agricole Assurances; banking is about 81% of group revenues.
More about Crédit Agricole
Its roots go back to 1885. The group had about 160,200 employees and €39.6 billion revenues in 2025.
Head office Montrouge, FranceStaff ~160,200 (Group, 2025)Revenue ~€39.6B revenues (Group, FY2025)Website ↗
Crédit Agricole's financed emissions, 229.7 MtCO2e in 2025 and 99.9% of its footprint, rose 1.3% in the year, though those of its oil and gas portfolio are 81% below 2020. Its own Scope 1 emissions fell 22%, and 90% of Crédit Agricole S.A.'s electricity is renewable, mostly through guarantees of origin. NGO data puts its fossil-fuel financing at about $11 billion in 2025.
Crédit Agricole scores 32/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score. Last verified October 2026.
That places Crédit Agricole joint 620th of 934 companies scored, and joint 36th of 59 in Financial Services / Banking.
What is Crédit Agricole doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Transparency & Accountability and Carbon Footprint: Operations (8/10, 7/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Nature & Biodiversity Impact (3/10, 4/10).
Where Crédit Agricole lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations7/10Its own emissions aren't independently verified or tracked over several years.
- Emissions from its supply chain6/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling3/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- How clean its energy is6/10Less than 90% of its energy shown to be renewable.
- Its effect on nature4/10Its effect on nature isn't measured or independently verified.
- How it uses materials and handles waste4/10No measurable waste or recycling targets reported publicly.
- Its effect on water4/10No measured water footprint with reduction targets.
- Its climate targets5/10Its targets aren't science-based or committed to the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports8/10No mission-locked structure, such as B Corp certification.
- Its record on controversies7/10Points deducted for controversies or its business model. The finding is under question 10.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
How is Crédit Agricole's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Crédit Agricole's score changed?
Crédit Agricole's score has moved from 27 to 32 across 2 recorded reviews, up 5 points.
- 27 → 32+529 October 2026
Re-scored under the current methodology (v2.5); own financed-emissions figure checked by hand against the report page; owner ruling 2026-10-29
- Scored 274 April 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Crédit Agricole's score based on?
14 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
43% of them were published by Crédit Agricole itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Crédit Agricole's financed emissions (about 229.7 MtCO2e in 2025) are the group's own stated PCAF figure, from pages 263 to 266 of its 2025 Universal Registration Document. They set the size deduction. The figure leaves out sovereign debt, loans to financial institutions, its insurer's investments (46.8 MtCO2e, reported separately) and Amundi.
8 of 14 sources are independent of the company.
“The share of renewable electricity in the energy mix has been increasing since 2023”
“Assessing material impacts and risks of nature loss on our activities”
“framework for the timber industry and the production of agricultural commodities linked to potential tropical deforestation”
“committed not to finance deepsea mining projects until it has been demonstrated”
“has still not committed to stopping financing the expansion of gas production”
“laid out plans to cut emissions tied to loans to five of its high-polluting sectors”
“has actually been declining for several years”
“Crédit Agricole ( 11 milliards )”
“has been awarded an A score (the Leadership category) by CDP for its climate strategy”
“a continué de financer de grandes entreprises développant de nouvelles mines et centrales à charbon”
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Is this your company? Claim this profile (free)
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current score and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Want your own page like this?
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
How does Crédit Agricole compare with other financial services / banking companies?
Where Crédit Agricole sits among financial services / banking peers.
Among the 59 major financial services / banking brands we've scored, Crédit Agricole is tied =36th of 59, with 6 others.
Who scores higher in Financial Services / Banking?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Crédit Agricole.
Commerzbank has cut emissions from its own banking operations 47% since 2021, but its financed emissions rose 24% in 2025 to about 92 MtCO2e.
See the breakdown →Jupiter's financed emissions rose 48% year-on-year to 26.2 MtCO2e while operational emissions fell marginally.
See the breakdown →SJP's emissions are rising sharply across Scope 3 (up 603% since 2016), its 2025 net zero operations target has failed, and multi-year trajectory data is corrupted by perimeter re-baselining.
See the breakdown →Which companies moved this week, and why.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score.