Methodology

Every SINK score is produced by the same formula, using the same rubric, applied to public data. No exceptions. No special treatment. This page explains exactly how it works so you can reproduce any score yourself.

The Formula

SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × Scale

Base Impact (30% weight)

A fixed score representing the sustainability ceiling of an industry. Oil & Gas scores 20 because the core business is extracting fossil fuels — no amount of solar panels on headquarters changes that. SaaS scores 75 because software has a fundamentally lower environmental footprint. This is a ceiling, not a floor — it caps how high a company in that sector can score.

Performance (70% weight)

Ten questions, each scored 0–10, based on publicly available evidence. This is where effort counts. A company that discloses fully, sets science-based targets, transitions to renewable energy, and maintains clean governance will score high regardless of their industry.

Scale Penalty (multiplier)

Total emissions volume determines a multiplier between 0.60x and 1.00x. A company emitting 50 million tonnes of CO₂e per year has its score reduced by 40% — because scale matters. Physics doesn't care about percentages. The planet experiences absolute tonnes, not relative improvement.

The 10-Question Rubric

Every company is assessed against these ten questions. Each is scored 0–10 based on the thresholds below. Performance = sum of all ten scores.

Q1Scope 1 & 2 Reporting
0
No emissions disclosure
3
Partial or unverified data
6
Full Scope 1 & 2, GHG Protocol aligned
10
Third-party verified, multi-year, granular breakdown
Q2Scope 3 Reporting
0
No Scope 3 data
3
1–2 categories only
6
Majority of material categories
10
Full value chain with methodology, verified
Q3Emissions Trajectory
0
Rising or no data
3
Flat or marginal decline
6
Consistent year-on-year reduction
10
On track for 1.5°C pathway across all scopes
Q4Science-Based Targets
0
No targets
3
Internal targets, not SBTi
6
SBTi committed or validated
10
SBTi validated with near and long-term, net zero pathway
Q5Offset Credibility
0
Heavy reliance on cheap offsets
3
Mix of offsets and reduction
6
Reduction-first, limited high-quality removals
10
No offsets or exclusively verified CDR, reduction-first
Q6Energy Transition
0
No renewable energy strategy
3
Under 25% renewable
6
50–90% renewable with clear plan
10
100% renewable (owned operations), supplier transition underway
Q7Governance & Accountability
0
No sustainability governance
3
CSR page exists, no board oversight
6
Dedicated officer, TCFD disclosure, board oversight
10
Exec compensation linked to climate, shareholder vote, mission-locked structure
Q8Lobbying Alignment
0
Active lobbying against climate policy
3
Mixed trade association memberships
6
Neutral, no misaligned lobbying
10
Active climate advocacy, published lobbying audit, distanced from misaligned groups
Q9Circular Economy & Supply Chain
0
Linear model, no supply chain engagement
3
Basic recycling or take-back
6
Measurable circular targets, supplier requirements
10
Closed-loop systems, full supply chain transparency, industry-leading practices
Q10Controversies & Red Flags
0
Major ongoing investigations, documented fraud
3
Multiple credible complaints or fines
6
Minor issues, addressed transparently
10
Clean record, proactive disclosure, industry awards

Base Impact by Industry

IndustryBase Score
Rewilding / Ecosystem Restoration85
SaaS / Digital Services75
Financial Services65
Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals55
Telecommunications55
Food & Beverage (non-meat)50
Electrical Equipment45
Electronics / Hardware45
Construction / Real Estate40
Food & Beverage (meat/dairy)35
Automotive35
Shipping / Logistics30
FMCG / Consumer Goods30
Chemicals25
Apparel (Durable)25
Apparel (Fast Fashion)20
Oil & Gas20
Mining & Extraction15
Coal10

New sectors added as companies are scored. Base scores set by editorial review and open to challenge.

Scale Penalty

Total EmissionsMultiplierEffect
Under 100K tonnes1.00xNo penalty
100K – 1M tonnes0.95x
1M – 10M tonnes0.82x
10M – 50M tonnes0.70x
50M+ tonnes0.60xMaximum penalty

Scoring Bands

86+
Near the frontier

Theoretical near-maximum. Requires exceptional performance across all dimensions at scale.

75–85
Exceptional

Best-in-class. Only a handful of companies in our database have reached this level.

60–74
Leading practice

Genuine sustainability leadership backed by verified data and science-based targets.

46–59
Making progress

Meaningful effort with room for improvement.

31–45
Below expectations

Some action but significant gaps remain.

16–30
Significant gaps

Major disclosure or performance deficiencies.

0–15
Critical concern

Minimal effort or actively harmful practices.

We don't grade on a curve. We grade against the planet. Scores above 75 are exceptionally rare — reflecting how demanding the rubric is. The majority of companies score between 30 and 60. A score of 60+ represents genuine sustainability leadership, the kind backed by verified data, science-based targets, and transparent governance.

Net Positive Badge

Net PositiveDisplayed alongside the SINK score

A separate designation for companies whose core business demonstrably removes more greenhouse gas than it creates. The badge is displayed alongside the SINK score — it does not change the score itself.

Eligibility requires all three:

1.Core business purpose is environmental restoration or carbon removal (not an offset programme bolted on)
2.Verified net negative emissions across all scopes, third-party verified
3.Credible removal methodology (DAC, verified reforestation with permanence, measurable ecosystem restoration)

Verification Tiers

◌ Pending Review

Scored using publicly available data. Awaiting community verification.

◉ Community Reviewed

At least 5 community verifications across the 10 questions, with fewer than 3 open challenges.

✓ Verified

At least 20 community verifications, fewer than 2 unresolved challenges, and score stable for 30+ days.

How to Challenge a Score

Every question on every score has a “Challenge” button. Click it, tell us which tier you think is correct, provide your evidence (a URL or explanation), and submit. That's it.

Challenges are reviewed by the community. If the evidence supports a score change, the score is updated and the challenger is credited publicly. All changes are logged in the score history.

We'd rather be corrected than wrong. That's the point.

Want to see it in action?
Browse the leaderboard to see real scores with full breakdowns.
View Leaderboard →