The first two scenarios in the SBTi Finance Tool are:
Scenario 1: “What-if” - all companies without targets set 2 °C targets
Scenario 2: “What-if” - all companies with targets set well below 2 °C targets
In the portfolio we are using, only a small minority of companies have targets under the WATS approach. If these scenarios are correct, we might expect that Scenario 1 would have a much greater impact on the temperature score than Scenario 2 because it involves >95% of the book setting targets. However, the S1S2 temperature score is 1.98 degrees and both scenarios. Is Scenario 2 a typo?
a) Should it be ““What-if” - all companies without targets set well below 2 °C targets”?
b) If yes to the above, why would the temperature scores be the same if all companies set 2D targets as if they set WB2D targets? Currently it seems impossible for the bank to hit the WB2D targets because even if their whole book sets WB2D their temperature rating is still nearly 2 degrees.
c) The ‘Companies with vs without targets’ also doesn’t update when you use what-if analysis, which is a bit confusing (e.g. under Scenario 1 it shows the original small percentage of companies have targets, when it should be 100%).