For real estate companies that recognize the value in climate risk software (as we covered in Part 1 of our two-parter on climate risk software for real estate decision-makers), the question isn’t whether to invest, but rather how to invest wisely.
How do you select the right climate risk software for your specific business needs? Making a confident, budget-justified decision starts with asking the right questions before selecting a provider and choosing software that can support near-term needs while laying the groundwork for longer-term risk management, investment, and strategic decision-making.
The challenge is real. Climate risk software capabilities vary widely, by data input, granularity, financial model quality, and methodology. Some tools focus on portfolio-level analysis, while others can deliver granular, asset-specific detail. For teams already navigating regulatory pressure, investor scrutiny, insurance constraints, and capital planning decisions, evaluating these options can feel overwhelming.
Drawing on Stok’s review of 15 climate risk software platforms and in-depth technical interviews with 10 climate risk software providers, we outline a clear, business-focused procurement framework that helps make sure your investment in climate risk software delivers measurable value beyond compliance.
CHOOSE THE RIGHT CLIMATE RISK SOFTWARE FOR YOUR NEAR-TERM AND STRATEGIC NEEDS
Rather than searching for a “perfect” tool, we recommend identifying the most critical decisions your organization needs to support over the next two to three years, and focusing on tools that can grow with you as your use cases mature. Climate risk software evolves quickly, and so will your internal capabilities and use cases, making periodic reassessment both normal and necessary.
Common challenges to anticipate
-
- The landscape is fragmented.
- Each tool models risks differently.
- Providers vary in quality, hazard coverage, and methodology.
- Many real estate teams lack internal capacity to interpret outputs and translate results into action.
This is often where pairing software with an experienced external advisor adds value, bridging the gap between technical outputs and real-world financial and operational decisions.
A practical procurement framework
The steps below are designed to help teams select climate risk software that can stand up to regulatory scrutiny while also providing consistent, defensible inputs for financial, risk, and investment decisions. Supplementing with Urban Land Institute’s (ULI) “10 Questions to Ask Providers” can help organizations see how each option can meet your business needs.
- Define internal objectives.
- Identify who will use the software.
- In-house teams (and their technical competency)
- Reliance on vendor support or third-party consultants
- Clarify required capabilities.
- Do you need physical risk analysis, transition risk analysis, or both?
- What geographies and specific physical hazards are most relevant to your portfolio?
- What scenarios and time horizons fit your strategic objectives? (e.g., SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, SSP5-8.5; 2030, 2040, 2050, 2100)
- What financial outputs do you need for the value at risk (VaR) calculations? (e.g., capital replacement and maintenance costs, business interruption, insurance premiums, credit risk)
- Do you need mitigation or adaptation recommendations? If so, do generic recommendations based on asset types work for your strategy, or would recommendations based on your company’s specific data work better?
- Conduct technical demos with selected providers.
- Evaluate technical quality, data methodology, and frequency of data updates.
- Assess cost, usability, and integration fit.
- Compare providers side-by-side (see our vendor table below as an example).
- Align the software to strategic planning, risk, and investment workflows.
A climate risk software provider cheat sheet
Stok has summarized this research into a vendor comparison cheat sheet, highlighting leading U.S.-market providers that support physical and transition risk analysis with transparency.
| Physical and Transition Coverage | Analysis Level | Best For | Adaptation/Mitigation Planning | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S&P Global Climanomics | Physical and Transition | Portfolio and Asset-level | Lenders Financial Sector | Yes, based on asset type models. |
| Moody’s Climate on Demand | Physical and Transition | Portfolio and Asset-level | Lenders Developers/Owners Tenants | Yes, based on asset type models. |
| MSCI Real Asset Climate Analysis | Physical and Transition | Portfolio and Asset-level | Lenders Developers/Owners Tenants | No |
| ClimateX Spectra & Adapt | Physical | Portfolio and Asset-level | Developers/Owners Operators Tenants | Yes, based on client- and building-specific data. |
| First Street Enterprise Suite | Physical | Asset-level | Developers/Owners Operators Tenants | Yes, based on client- and building-specific data. |
| ClimateFirst | Physical | Portfolio and Asset-level | Developers/Owners Operators | Yes, based on client- and building-specific data. |
| Risk Thinking AI VELO | Physical | Portfolio and Asset-level | Developers/Owners Non-real estate sectors | Yes, based on asset type models. |
| Jupiter ClimateScore Global | Physical | Portfolio and Asset-level | Developers/Owners Non-real estate sectors Tenants | Yes, based on asset type models. |
| MunichRE | Physical | Portfolio and Asset-level | Developers/Owners Non-real estate sectors | No |
Note: Stok completed this analysis in Q3 2025.
USE CLIMATE RISK SCENARIO ANALYSIS TO DRIVE FINANCIAL, RISK, AND STRATEGIC DECISIONS
Many organizations stop short after completing climate risk assessments, using them as a reporting exercise rather than a strategic input. S&P Global recently reported that while many companies are assessing physical climate risk, fewer are planning on how to adapt, meaning they’re losing out on the long-term value this investment can bring.
The real return on climate risk software comes from progressively using climate scenario analysis results to inform risk management, investment, and strategic decision-making, driving long-term value and future-proofing your assets.
Reviewing the table below, determine which of these mitigation/adaptation measures is most important to your strategy and discuss how each provider can meet these needs during the selection process.
How climate risk data drives value by stakeholder
| Real Estate Stakeholder | Mitigation/Adaptation Measures |
|---|---|
| Lenders | • Integrate climate risk analysis into loan screening • Adjust loan-to-value ratios • Require insurance coverage or resilience measures • Rebalance portfolios away from high-risk areas |
| Developers & Owners | • Screen acquisitions for climate exposure to filter out high-risk acquisitions • Adjust underwriting assumptions (e.g., cap rates, discount rates) • Budget resilience measures into capital planning • Divest high-risk assets before markets reprice them |
| Operators | • Prioritize CAPEX for mechanical upgrades ahead of hazard timelines • Develop site-specific emergency response plans • Reduce downtime and business interruption • Negotiate better insurance terms • Strengthen tenant trust and satisfaction |
| Tenants | • Choose more resilient locations • Improve business continuity planning • Strengthen lease negotiations • Support energy, emissions, and net-zero targets • Protect workforce health and safety (e.g., exposure to extreme heat or wildfire smoke) |
When climate risk software is selected with these downstream decisions in mind, it moves beyond compliance and becomes a financial risk management and value-protection tool.
WHAT NOW?
The right climate risk software and implementation approach can help you reduce risk, protect asset value, stabilize insurance costs, and meet regulatory and investor expectations with confidence.
Stok supports real estate organizations in every step of this process, from defining requirements and evaluating vendors to translating scenario outputs into actionable mitigation and adaptation strategies that protect long-term value. Reach out to start the conversation.
