ESG Score: How It’s Calculated, Meaning and Improvement

The same company can hold an AAA rating from one agency and a middling grade from another. That paradox sits at the heart of the ESG score, a number that increasingly shapes which companies attract investment and on what terms. An ESG score is an independent assessment of an organisation’s performance across environmental, social and governance factors, produced by specialised rating agencies from public disclosures ^[1]. This article explains what an ESG score means, how it is calculated by the major agencies, why it matters financially, and the concrete steps that improve it.

What an ESG score is and what it means

An ESG score quantifies how well a company manages risks and impacts across three pillars: environmental factors such as emissions and resource use, social factors such as labour practices and community relations, and governance factors such as board structure and business ethics. The score is usually expressed as a number, typically on a scale of zero to one hundred, while an ESG rating is a categorical classification such as a letter grade or a risk tier ^[2]. In practice the two terms are often used interchangeably.

The critical nuance is that no global standard governs ESG scoring. The absence of standardisation means the same company can receive very different scores from different agencies, which complicates comparison and reduces reliability ^[2]. Understanding a score therefore starts with understanding the methodology behind it, and how it fits the wider landscape of ESG regulations and frameworks.

How an ESG score is calculated

Rating agencies collect data from public disclosures, company reports and third-party sources, then weight it by the issues most material to a company’s industry before producing a final score. The methodologies diverge sharply, which is why grades differ. The table below compares the three most widely referenced approaches.

The key distinction is that Sustainalytics uses an absolute risk approach while MSCI scores relative to sector peers, which makes cross-sector comparison simpler under a consistent standard ^[2]. Because each agency weights and interprets data differently, a strong score depends heavily on the quality and completeness of a company’s own disclosures. Anchoring environmental data in a recognised framework such as the GHG Protocol for carbon accounting is a foundational step, and a structured materiality assessment determines which issues carry the most weight.

Why an ESG score matters for a company

An ESG score is no longer a reputational badge; it is tied to real financial outcomes. Investors use scores to identify companies likely to deliver sustainable long-term returns and to avoid those carrying greater ESG-related risk ^[1]. The clearest link runs through the cost of capital. Companies with strong ESG standing often find it easier to access financing, which supports valuation by freeing resources for growth, while poor performance can restrict access to capital and raise borrowing costs ^[4].

The effects extend beyond finance. A strong score can lower interest rates and improve funding terms, and firms with better ESG performance are frequently viewed as lower risk, making it easier to secure capital, win supply chain partnerships and attract talent ^[1]. For any organisation, the score increasingly functions as a gateway to capital, partners and people, which is why examples of companies leading on sustainability treat it as a strategic metric rather than a compliance afterthought.

How to improve an ESG score

Improving an ESG score is a data and disclosure exercise before it is a communications one. The steps below reflect current best practice.

• Set specific, measurable goals: replace vague statements with baseline metrics and SMART targets that include concrete numbers, timelines and acknowledged gaps, so progress can be measured and corrected ^[5].
• Run a double materiality assessment: identify which issues affect the business financially and which the business affects in the wider world, defining the technical scope before anything else ^[6].
• Adopt an established framework: recognised frameworks such as GRI, SASB and TCFD streamline data collection and increase trust in the resulting report ^[5].
• Engage stakeholders and document outcomes: treat stakeholder engagement as a primary, traceable data source, and record a documented outcome for every topic assessed, whether judged material or not ^[6].
• Secure leadership validation: present results to the executive team and board, since sign-off creates accountability and ensures the assessment reflects strategic reality ^[6].

Underpinning all of these is data quality. Automating collection and keeping every figure traceable to a source is what allows a company to disclose completely and consistently, which is exactly what agencies reward. Choosing the right sustainability reporting platform is often the difference between a defensible score and an incomplete one.

What an ESG score means for production companies and events

Media groups, production companies and event organisers face the same ESG scrutiny as any other sector, but with a footprint that is unusually fragmented. A single production spreads emissions across travel, energy for studios and locations, set construction, catering, accommodation and a fast-growing digital and post-production layer. Rating agencies reward complete, traceable data, yet much of this activity is handled by short-term crews and a long chain of suppliers, which makes consistent measurement genuinely hard. A production company that cannot account for its full footprint will struggle to disclose the environmental metrics that feed an ESG score.

Live events compress the same challenge into days. Festivals and corporate events generate concentrated impacts through onsite power, audience and crew mobility, local suppliers and waste, often with little time to capture data before the site is dismantled. The organisations that score well are those that measure at source rather than estimating afterwards, building an auditable record across every project. TheGreenshot’s client work, including real-time carbon tracking with Banijay, shows how automated measurement turns a fragmented production footprint into the kind of reliable data an ESG assessment demands.

Conclusion

An ESG score condenses a company’s environmental, social and governance performance into a single signal that investors, lenders and partners now read closely. Because agencies such as MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P Global apply different methodologies, the same company can be scored very differently, and a strong result depends above all on complete, well-documented disclosure. Improving an ESG score comes down to setting measurable targets, running a double materiality assessment, adopting a recognised framework and, underpinning it all, capturing high-quality data that traces back to its source. As ESG scores become ever more tightly linked to the cost of capital, the discipline of measuring accurately is fast becoming a core business capability rather than a reporting formality.

FAQ

Going further with TheGreenshot