RVBA-LAND

Landsec — all ratios

Every ratio computed across all reporting years where the inputs are available (2020-2025). Each card shows the ratio, value for the selected year, trend over time, and peer benchmark.

§1

Carbon intensity

The five canonical intensities: Revenue, Operational (OpEx), Economic (EVIC), Asset (PP&E + leased), and Workforce (per FTE). Same five as the headline tiles on the company hero.

§1.5

Revenue intensity

Industry-standard reference for comparability with CDP/MSCI.

2023
2.4k
tCO2e / $m
Peer cohort benchmark · 10 firms · lower is better
0.00
371
742
1.1k
1.5k
1.9k
2.2k
2.6k
median 221.18
Landsec · 2359.32 · FY2023
Sector viewSee full peer benchmarksReal Estate & REITs
§1.3

Operational intensity

OpEx is structurally stable; carbon-per-OpEx removes margin distortion. The procurement-relevant comparison.

2023
3.7k
tCO2e / $m
Peer cohort benchmark · 8 firms · lower is better
0.00
589
1.2k
1.8k
2.4k
2.9k
3.5k
4.1k
median 380.64
Landsec · 3747.31 · FY2023
Sector viewSee full peer benchmarksReal Estate & REITs
§7.3

Economic intensity

EU/SFDR PAI 3, EU CTB and PAB, TCFD-recommended. EVIC reflects emissions per unit of all capital deployed (equity + debt + minority interest + cash) so it's robust to capital-structure differences.

2023
192
tCO2e / $m
Peer cohort benchmark · 8 firms · lower is better
0.00
30
60
91
121
151
181
212
median 20.77
Landsec · 192.31 · FY2023
Sector viewSee full peer benchmarksReal Estate & REITs
§7.2

Asset intensity

Asset intensity using full Scope 1+2+3, consistent with the other headline intensities (Operational/Economic/Revenue) for apples-to-apples comparison.

2021
6.2k
tCO2e / $m
Peer cohort benchmark · 10 firms · lower is better
0.00
1.6k
3.2k
4.7k
6.3k
7.9k
9.5k
11k
median 2009.91
Landsec · 6197.34 · FY2021
Sector viewSee full peer benchmarksReal Estate & REITs
§1.1

Workforce intensity

The most complete view of per-person emissions — captures delivery model, supply chain and travel.

2023
342
tCO2e / FTE
Peer cohort benchmark · 10 firms · lower is better
0.00
284
568
852
1.1k
1.4k
1.7k
2.0k
median 335.13
Landsec · 342.34 · FY2023
Sector viewSee full peer benchmarksReal Estate & REITs
§2

Scope-mix

How emissions are distributed — diagnostic of what kind of company this actually is.

§2.1

Business travel as % of Scope 3

Diagnostic for delivery model — how dependent the firm is on travel.

2023
0.13%
share of total
§2.2

Purchased goods & services as % of Scope 3

Largest Scope 3 line for most service firms. High share = vendor management is the carbon lever.

2023
17.3%
share of total
§2.3

Scope 1 as % of total

High Scope 1 % flags direct combustion / fleet — different abatement path to office-based services.

2023
2.72%
share of total
§2.4

Scope 2 as % of total

High Scope 2 % means electricity procurement is the biggest lever — pair with §4.3 renewable %.

2023
1.29%
share of total
§2.5

Scope 2 location-vs-market gap

Size of carbon reductions claimed via REC/PPA purchases. Read it as a share of location-based Scope 2: ~0 = market ≈ location (little instrument reliance, the numbers are physical); up to ~30% = moderate; >50% = most of the reported Scope-2 reduction comes from market instruments (RECs/PPAs) rather than physical change. A large gap isn't inherently bad, but it means the headline depends on procurement, not grid decarbonisation at the sites.

2023
14.9k
tCO2e
§4.3

Renewable electricity %

Key Scope 2 lever. A firm at 90% renewable has very different abatement remaining to one at 20%.

2023
100%
share of total
Disclosed directly by the company — not computed by Reverberate.
§4

Disclosure quality

Signal of how trustworthy the numbers are.

§4.1

Scope 3 categories disclosed

Undisclosed is not zero. A firm reporting only travel + purchased goods has a structurally lower Scope 3 number than a firm that also reports use-of-sold-products.

2025
0.00
/ 15
§4.2

Verification rate (Reverberate confidence)

Reverberate-internal proxy for data quality — the share of this year's metrics we hold at high extraction confidence (≥ 0.8). How it's computed: every extracted metric carries a 0–1 confidence (1.0 = explicit value with a clear label + unit; 0.6 = found in narrative; 0.4 = inferred from context). This is the unweighted count of metrics at ≥ 0.8 over the total — it is NOT scope- or category-weighted, so a firm reporting many easy fields can score highly even if a key Scope 3 figure is low-confidence. Treat it as 'how cleanly disclosed', not 'how complete'.

2025
94.7%
share of total
§5

Financial context

Operational context that helps interpret the carbon ratios.

§5.0

Total revenue

Top-line scale. Pairs with Total OpEx + Net profit to give a P&L-style read of the business before the carbon ratios are layered on.

2025
88.3M
USD
+3.7% vs FY2024
§5.3

Total OpEx

Operations growing fast? Then absolute-emissions targets are harder to hit. Useful for interpreting whether a flat trajectory means efficiency gains or stagnation.

2025
64.3M
USD
+19.5% vs FY2024
§5.05

Total net profit

Bottom-line scale. Negative values indicate a loss-making year — useful context for interpreting capex and decarbonisation ambition.

2025
13.5M
USD
+1.8% vs FY2024
§5.2

OpEx as % of revenue

Inverse margin proxy. Used to sanity-check OpEx-vs-revenue divergence (the methodological reason for using OpEx as the carbon denominator).

2025
72.8%
share of total
§5.4

Total FTE

A firm growing headcount 20%/yr will struggle to hit absolute reduction targets without intensity gains. Interpret CO2e/FTE alongside this.

2023
623
people
+10.3% vs FY2022
§5.1

Revenue per FTE

Productivity proxy. Useful context when interpreting CO2e/FTE — a highly-leveraged firm should have lower per-person emissions if the model works.

2023
145.1k
$ / FTE
§7

Capital-deployed (extended)

Variants of the asset + economic intensities — Scope 1+2-only and infrastructure-only Scope 3 cuts — for diagnostic comparison alongside the headline §1 cards. Plus financed emissions (PCAF) for asset managers + marginal intensity for capex efficiency.

§7.2

CO2e per $m PP&E + leased — Scope 1+2

Carbon intensity of long-term physical infrastructure on the balance sheet. Surfaces stranded-asset risk: a real-estate-heavy firm with a high number is locking in fossil-era infrastructure.

2021
278
tCO2e / $m
RoU assets not disclosed — denominator is PP&E only
§7.1

CO2e per $m PP&E + leased — Scope 1+2 + S3 cat 8/13

The full physical-infrastructure view, including leased upstream and downstream assets. Cleaner than total Scope 3 because we restrict to the infrastructure-relevant categories (cat 8 + cat 13).

no data
tCO2e / $m PP&E
no data points to chart
§7.3

CO2e per $m EVIC — Scope 1+2 only

The Scope 1+2-only EVIC intensity — the cleanest cross-firm capital-aligned comparison, free of Scope 3 disclosure variance.

2023
7.73
tCO2e / $m
§7.4

Financed emissions per $m invested (PCAF, Scope 3 cat 15)

PCAF attribution of investee emissions to the financier. The standard for asset managers, banks, and insurers reporting under net-zero commitments.

no data
tCO2e / $m financed
no data points to chart
§7.5

Marginal carbon intensity (3yr Δemissions / Δcapex)

Forward-looking, not static. Asks: of the capital this firm is deploying right now, is it decarbonising the business or locking in fossil infrastructure? Two firms with identical static intensity can look very different here.

2023
-40.7
tCO2e / $m
§3

Trajectory

Per-target progress against base year, plus the 1.5°C-aligned pathway as an independent benchmark.

No targets with numeric reduction values found. Trajectory ratios need a target_value, base_year and target_year.

26 per-year ratios · 0 trajectory ratios · 6 reporting years