Purpose of this article
This article explains how GRESB-aligned data coverage is calculated in Scaler and where it appears across the platform. GRESB-aligned data coverage measures data availability for external reporting and benchmarking aligned with the GRESB Real Estate Assessment.
Important: GRESB's methodology has specific constraints that can make data coverage appear more complete than it actually is. This article explains these limitations and why Scaler also provides Scaler data coverage for meter-level quality assurance.
Comparing GRESB-aligned and Scaler data coverage
Scaler provides two complementary data coverage metrics. Each serves a different purpose:
Aspect | GRESB-aligned data coverage | Scaler data coverage |
Primary purpose | External reporting and benchmarking | Data quality and completeness |
Used in | Analytics Portal, reports, GRESB submissions | Data Collection Portal only |
Calculation level | Asset level (aggregated) | Meter level (weighted) |
Resources covered | Energy, water, waste | Energy, water, waste |
Area perspective | Sum of covered areas across all categories ÷ Sum of maximum areas | Weighted by meter covered area, evaluated against total floor area per area type |
Time perspective | Scaler uses widest date range to maximize coverage | Meter-level time availability, weighted by meter size |
Treatment of gaps | Aggregated — gaps may be hidden | Explicit — gaps are visible |
On-site renewables | Excluded | Included |
What it tells you | Asset-level completeness for GRESB reporting | Underlying meter data is complete |
When to use GRESB-aligned data coverage: GRESB submissions, portfolio analytics, external reporting, benchmarking
When to use Scaler data coverage: QA, data validation, identifying missing meters, prioritizing data collection
What GRESB-aligned data coverage measures
GRESB-aligned data coverage measures data availability for external reporting and benchmarking aligned with the GRESB Real Estate Assessment.
It assesses reporting completeness at asset level and supports standardized comparison across portfolios and participants.
Applies to: Energy, water, and waste
Critical to understand: GRESB-aligned data coverage is designed for standardized benchmarking, not for assessing meter-level data completeness. An asset can show 100% GRESB-aligned data coverage while having significant gaps in underlying meter data. This is expected behavior and reflects GRESB's aggregated reporting requirements.
Where GRESB-aligned data coverage appears in Scaler
Analytics Portal
- Portfolio Overview / Performance / Asset List; Asset Overview / Performance
- Applies to Energy, GHG Emissions, Water, and Waste
- Drives data coverage graphs and related KPIs
- Scores → GRESB visualizations and calculations
- Performance dashboards show data coverage broken down by resource category (fuels, district heating & cooling, electricity for energy; water; waste)
Data Collection Portal
- Portfolio → Asset List → Energy/Water/Waste (Data/Time/Area coverage) → GRESB option
- Portfolio → Asset List → edit → Meters & Consumption → GRESB Data coverage
Reports & Exports
- GRESB Real Estate Asset Spreadsheet
- Data Exports with calculated metrics prefixed
gresb_data_coverage
How GRESB-aligned data coverage is calculated
GRESB-aligned data coverage is calculated at asset level using an aggregated approach:
GRESB_aligned_DATA_COVERAGE = AREA_COVERAGE × TIME_COVERAGE
Both components are calculated using the same underlying meter data but apply GRESB's specific aggregation rules, which have important limitations.
This methodology applies to: Energy, water, and waste
Scaler's interpretation of GRESB's time coverage guidance
The challenge: GRESB's published guidance does not explicitly define how to handle situations where meters have different date ranges, particularly when those ranges do not overlap.
Expand
Example scenario:
- Meter 1 has data for January only
- Meter 2 has data for December only
- No overlap exists between the two periods
Scaler's position:
Scaler takes the position that data coverage does exist in these scenarios and uses the widest date range approach: the earliest start date and the latest end date across all meters within a resource category.
This means:
- Start date = earliest start date from any meter
- End date = latest end date from any meter
- Time coverage reflects the full span, even if gaps exist between meters
Why Scaler uses this approach:
- GRESB's guidance is ambiguous on how to handle non-overlapping date ranges
- Clients have coverage - they do have consumption data for multiple periods, even if those periods don't overlap
- GRESB's spreadsheet constraint - The GRESB Asset Spreadsheet only allows one date range to be reported per resource, making it structurally impossible to represent non-overlapping periods accurately
- Maximizes client coverage scores - This interpretation favors clients compared to alternative approaches
Alternative interpretations:
Some interpretations of GRESB's guidance may report non-overlapping date ranges as 0% time coverage. Scaler takes a different approach, as this would penalize clients for having data in multiple periods simply because those periods don't connect.
Impact on reporting:
This interpretation means Scaler generates the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet using the widest date range, giving clients credit for all periods where data exists.
Important note: This approach is taken as a result of GRESB's published guidance and GRESB's structural constraint of allowing only one date range per resource per asset.
Area coverage
How area coverage is reported in the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet:
For energy, each category is reported separately with:
- Floor area covered - the floor area monitored by meters for that category
- Maximum floor area - the total floor area that could be covered for that category
This means you report three separate sets of values for energy:
- Fuels: Floor area covered + Maximum floor area
- DHC: Floor area covered + Maximum floor area
- Electricity: Floor area covered + Maximum floor area
For water and waste, the same principle applies but with simpler category structures.
How GRESB calculates area coverage:
GRESB sums all floor areas covered across all categories, then divides by the sum of all maximum floor areas.
AREA_COVERAGE = (FUELS_COVERED + DHC_COVERED + ELECTRICITY_COVERED) ÷ (FUELS_MAX + DHC_MAX + ELECTRICITY_MAX)
For water and waste: Similar logic applies with their respective categories.
Example 1 - Electricity only, fuel connection exists but not monitored:
- Electricity covers 1,000 m² (max: 1,000 m²)
- Fuel connection exists but not monitored: 0 m² (max: 1,000 m²)
- DHC not applicable: 0 m² (max: 0 m²)
→ Area coverage = (1,000 + 0 + 0) ÷ (1,000 + 1,000 + 0) = 1,000 ÷ 2,000 = 50%
Example 2 - All energy types monitored:
- Electricity covers 1,000 m² (max: 1,000 m²)
- Fuels covers 1,000 m² (max: 1,000 m²)
- DHC covers 1,000 m² (max: 1,000 m²)
→ Area coverage = (1,000 + 1,000 + 1,000) ÷ (1,000 + 1,000 + 1,000) = 3,000 ÷ 3,000 = 100%
Why GRESB uses this methodology
GRESB's approach assumes that achieving comprehensive coverage requires monitoring all applicable categories. By summing across categories, GRESB ensures that:
- An asset cannot achieve 100% area coverage by monitoring only one category
- The calculation rewards monitoring multiple sources
- Coverage reflects the breadth of data collection across the building
This approach penalizes missing categories even when one category is fully monitored.
Time coverage
The critical limitation:
GRESB's Asset Spreadsheet allows you to report only ONE date range per resource per asset. For energy, this means one date range applied across fuels, DHC, and electricity. This creates a fundamental challenge when meters within that resource have different time availabilities.
How Scaler handles this limitation:
To work within GRESB's constraint while maximizing your reported coverage, Scaler takes the widest date range available: the earliest start date and the latest end date across all meters for that resource.
Example - Different meters, different periods (energy):
- Electricity meter: 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31 (12 months)
- Fuel meter: 2025-12-01 to 2025-12-31 (1 month only)
→ GRESB time coverage = 100% (based on outer range: Jan 1 to Dec 31)
Why this happens: GRESB's spreadsheet only accepts one "From" date and one "To" date for all energy meters at the asset. Scaler reports "2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31" because this is the widest span, even though the fuel meter only has 1 month of data.
This approach:
- Maximizes your coverage score
- Gives you credit for all periods where any meter has data
- Works within GRESB's structural constraint
How asset status affects GRESB time coverage
GRESB only requires performance data reporting for periods when an asset is classified as a Status = Standing Investment. Assets classified as New Construction or Major Renovation are not expected to have consumption data for those periods.
How this affects time coverage calculation:
- Time coverage is calculated only for the portion of the reporting period when the asset was a Standing Investment
- If an asset transitions from New Construction to Standing Investment mid-year, time coverage is evaluated only from the Standing Investment date forward
Example:
- Asset becomes Standing Investment on July 1
- Meter has data from July 1 to December 31
- Time coverage = 100% (for the Standing Investment period)
This is reflected in GRESB's Ownership Period calculation, which excludes non-Standing Investment periods from the denominator.
GRESB-aligned data coverage in Scaler vs. the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet
While Scaler follows GRESB's methodology, there is an important difference in how data coverage is visualized in Scaler compared to what's reported in the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet.
In the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet:
For energy: One time range is reported for the entire asset, covering fuels, DHC, and electricity together (all on one row in the spreadsheet)
Constraint: You cannot report different time ranges for fuels vs. DHC vs. electricity
In Scaler's GRESB-aligned visualizations:
For energy: Each category (fuels, DHC, electricity) can have its own time coverage, calculated using the GRESB-aligned methodology within that category
How it works:
- For fuels, Scaler takes the widest date range across all fuel meters
- For DHC, Scaler takes the widest date range across all DHC meters
- For electricity, Scaler takes the widest date range across all electricity meters
- These three category-level coverages are combined to show overall energy data coverage
Where you see this:
Analytics Portal → Performance Dashboards:
- Energy data coverage is broken down by fuels, district heating & cooling, and electricity
- Each category shows its own coverage percentage
- Example: Fuels 100%, DHC N/A, Electricity 80%
Data Collection Portal → Asset List:
- Energy data coverage columns can show the GRESB-aligned metric
- Reflects the more granular category-level calculation
Data Collection Portal → Asset List → Meters & Consumption:
- Additional coverage metrics shown for the asset-level in the meter view
Why this difference matters:
More granular insight: Scaler's approach provides more visibility into which energy categories have complete data
Still GRESB-aligned: The methodology for each category follows GRESB's approach (widest date range, area coverage summing)
Easier prioritization: You can see which specific energy categories need attention
Example scenario:
- Fuels: 100% coverage (all fuel meters span full year)
- DHC: Not applicable (no DHC connection)
- Electricity: 75% coverage (electricity meters only cover 9 months)
In the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet, these would be combined into a single time range. In Scaler's visualizations, you can see the breakdown and know to focus on electricity data.
Important: When Scaler generates the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet for submission, it uses the widest date range across all three categories to populate the single time range field, ensuring compliance with GRESB's format.
Why GRESB-aligned and Scaler data coverage differ
The differences between GRESB-aligned and Scaler data coverage stem from two methodological constraints in GRESB's reporting format:
1. GRESB's single time range limitation
The constraint: GRESB allows only one time range to be reported per resource per asset in the spreadsheet format.
The impact: Time coverage can appear artificially high when meters have different date ranges.
Scaler's interpretation: Use the widest date range (earliest start date to latest end date) to maximize client coverage scores within this constraint.
Example:
- Asset with 1,000 m² whole building meters
- Electricity: 120 kWh from 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31 (full year)
- Fuel: 10 kWh from 2025-12-01 to 2025-12-31 (1 month only)
Results:
- GRESB time coverage: 100% (widest range spans full year)
- GRESB area coverage: 100% (both energy categories monitored)
- GRESB-aligned data coverage: 100%
- Scaler data coverage: 55.4% (reveals fuel meter only has 1 month)
What this reveals: GRESB-aligned coverage shows the asset has data presence across the full year, while Scaler's meter-level calculation shows that the fuel data is actually incomplete.
2. The placeholder meter requirement
The constraint: GRESB's area coverage formula sums across all applicable categories in both the numerator (covered area) and denominator (maximum area).
The impact: If a connection exists but you don't create a meter for it in Scaler, the denominator still needs to account for it to report accurately to GRESB.
Example - Without placeholder meter:
- Asset: 1,000 m² with electricity fully monitored
- Fuel connection exists but no fuel meter created
If reported with only electricity:
- Area coverage = 1,000 ÷ 1,000 = 100% (incorrect for GRESB)
Example - With placeholder meter:
- Asset: 1,000 m² with electricity fully monitored
- Fuel connection exists → create placeholder meter with 0 m² covered area
Correctly reported:
- Area coverage = (1,000 + 0) ÷ (1,000 + 1,000) = 50% (correct for GRESB)
Why placeholder meters are necessary: They ensure your GRESB-aligned data coverage accurately reflects that you're aware a category exists but you don't have data for it. Without placeholder meters, GRESB area coverage would overstate your actual monitoring coverage.
Placeholder meters for GRESB reporting
When a connection exists but you do not have consumption data, you need to create a placeholder meter to achieve accurate GRESB-aligned data coverage reporting.
What are placeholder meters?
Placeholder meters represent areas where consumption occurs but data is not yet available. They ensure GRESB-aligned data coverage accurately reflects gaps in your data collection while maintaining proper area coverage accounting.
Note: You may hear these referred to as "ghost meters" in communications with your Account Operations Manager.
When to create placeholder meters:
- A connection exists (electricity, fuel, DHC for energy; water source; waste stream) but you cannot obtain consumption data
- You need to report to GRESB and want to accurately represent your data collection gaps
- You're working toward full data collection but need to document known gaps
How to create placeholder meters:
- Navigate to Data Collection Portal → Portfolio → Asset List
- Edit the asset and open Meters & Consumption
- Click Add meter
- Configure the meter with:
- Appropriate Area type
- Covered area = 0 m² (or the known area if partial)
- Subcategory reflecting the category (e.g., Natural gas, Potable water, General waste)
- Meter version start date and Meter version end date for the reporting period
- Leave consumption data empty
- Set Include in calculations to
yes
Tip: Placeholder meters should be clearly labeled in the Description field (e.g., "Placeholder - Natural Gas - Tenant area"). This helps your team identify meters that need real data in the future.
Impact on coverage:
- GRESB area coverage will accurately reflect that the category exists but isn't fully monitored
- GRESB time coverage will span the placeholder meter's date range
- GRESB-aligned data coverage will be calculated as Area coverage × Time coverage
- Scaler data coverage will show the meter's actual contribution (0% if no data exists)
GRESB-aligned data coverage calculation examples
These examples demonstrate how GRESB-aligned data coverage behaves under different meter configurations and why it may differ from Scaler data coverage. Both metrics calculate correctly according to their respective methodologies - the differences reflect GRESB's aggregated approach versus Scaler's meter-weighted approach.
Note: These examples use energy for illustration, but the same principles apply to water and waste.
Understanding the methodological differences
GRESB's methodology constraints:
- Area coverage sums across all categories, penalizing missing categories
- Time coverage uses a single range per resource (Scaler uses widest range to maximize coverage)
- These constraints support standardized benchmarking but can hide meter-level gaps
Scaler's approach: Weights each meter's time coverage by its covered area to reveal actual data completeness.
Important: The scenarios below show how these methodological differences affect coverage calculations - not calculation errors.
Example 1: Electricity only, fuel connection not monitored
Asset: 1,000 m² with whole building meters
Meters:
- Electricity: 120 kWh from 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31
- Fuel connection exists but not monitored: 0 kWh (placeholder meter created)
GRESB calculation:
- Time coverage: 100% (based on electricity meter's full-year availability)
- Area coverage: 50% (only one of two energy categories is monitored: (1,000 + 0) ÷ (1,000 + 1,000))
- GRESB data coverage: 50%
Scaler data coverage: 50%
What this reveals: Both metrics align because the missing fuel monitoring is reflected in area coverage for both methodologies.
Example 2: Electricity full year, fuel partial year
Asset: 1,000 m² with whole building meters
Meters:
- Electricity: 120 kWh from 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31 (full year)
- Fuel: 10 kWh from 2025-12-01 to 2025-12-31 (December only)
GRESB calculation:
- Time coverage: 100% (widest range across any energy type is full year: Jan 1 to Dec 31)
- Area coverage: 100% (both energy categories are monitored: (1,000 + 1,000) ÷ (1,000 + 1,000))
- GRESB data coverage: 100%
Scaler data coverage: 55.4%
What this reveals:
- GRESB-aligned data coverage shows the asset has data presence for both energy types across the full year
- Scaler data coverage reveals the fuel meter only has 1 month of actual data
- Both calculations are correct for their intended purpose
Why this happens: Scaler uses the widest date range (Jan 1 to Dec 31) to maximize GRESB coverage. Scaler's meter-weighted calculation shows that only 55.4% of the expected meter-level data exists.
Example 3: Two energy types, non-overlapping months
Asset: 1,000 m² with whole building meters
Meters:
- Electricity: 10 kWh for December only (2025-12-01 to 2025-12-31)
- Fuel: 10 kWh for January only (2025-01-01 to 2025-01-31)
GRESB calculation:
- Time coverage: 100% (outer range from January to December spans full year)
- Area coverage: 100% (both energy categories monitored)
- GRESB data coverage: 100%
What this reveals:
- Scaler's interpretation uses the widest date range (earliest to latest), giving credit for both periods
- Scaler's meter-level calculation shows that only 2 months out of 12 actually have data (1 month per meter = 8.77%)
- This is the most extreme example of how GRESB's aggregation can hide data gaps
Why Scaler uses this approach: The GRESB Asset Spreadsheet only accepts one date range per resource. Some interpretations might report this as 0% coverage because the periods don't overlap. Scaler takes the position that coverage does exist (data is present in two periods) and reports the widest range (2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31) to give clients credit for their data.
Example 4: Two energy types, same month only
Asset: 1,000 m² with whole building meters
Meters:
- Electricity: 10 kWh for January only (2025-01-01 to 2025-01-31)
- Fuel: 10 kWh for January only (2025-01-01 to 2025-01-31)
GRESB calculation:
- Time coverage: 8.77% (outer range is 1 month = 31 days ÷ 365 days)
- Area coverage: 100%
- GRESB data coverage: 8.77%
Scaler data coverage: 8.77%
What this reveals: When meters have overlapping time periods, the widest range approach accurately reflects actual data availability. Both metrics align because there are no hidden gaps.
Key takeaway from these examples
The differences between GRESB-aligned and Scaler data coverage are not calculation errors. They reflect:
- GRESB's design: Optimized for standardized reporting and benchmarking across portfolios, accepting some loss of granularity due to structural constraints in the reporting format
- Scaler's interpretation: Uses widest date range to maximize client coverage within GRESB's constraints
- Scaler data coverage's design: Optimized for data quality assessment and gap detection at the meter level
Use GRESB-aligned data coverage for: Reporting to GRESB, external benchmarking, portfolio analytics
Use Scaler data coverage for: Data quality work, identifying specific gaps, prioritizing data collection efforts
Methodological constraints of GRESB-aligned data coverage
GRESB-aligned data coverage has several intentional constraints imposed by the GRESB Real Estate Assessment format:
Structural constraints:
- Only one date range may be reported per resource per asset in the GRESB Asset Spreadsheet (Scaler's visualizations are more granular)
- Coverage is reported annually, not at meter level
- Area coverage sums across all categories within a resource
- On-site renewable electricity is excluded from coverage calculations
Why these constraints exist: These design choices support standardized benchmarking across thousands of assets and portfolios globally. However, they limit visibility into partial or missing meter data.
What this means for you: GRESB-aligned data coverage shows what you're reporting to GRESB for scoring and benchmarking. Scaler data coverage tells you whether your underlying data is actually complete. Both metrics are valuable for different purposes.
Relationship to Scaler data coverage
GRESB-aligned data coverage and Scaler data coverage serve different purposes and are calculated using different levels of granularity:
- GRESB-aligned data coverage provides an asset-level indicator aligned with external benchmarking requirements
- Scaler data coverage provides a meter-level data completeness indicator for internal QA
Expected behavior:
- An asset may show 100% GRESB-aligned data coverage
- While still having incomplete or missing data on individual meters
This difference is expected and reflects the distinct objectives of each metric. Use Scaler data coverage to identify and resolve meter-level gaps that GRESB's aggregated methodology cannot detect.
Troubleshooting & common questions
Why does my asset show 100% GRESB-aligned data coverage when I know I'm missing data?
GRESB-aligned data coverage uses aggregated asset-level logic. If your widest date range spans the full year and all applicable categories have at least some monitoring (even if incomplete), GRESB-aligned data coverage can reach 100%. This reflects what you'll report to GRESB, not actual meter-level completeness. Use Scaler data coverage to see the full picture.
Why is my GRESB time coverage 100% when one of my meters only has 3 months of data?
Scaler takes the widest date range across all meters for that resource. If another meter has 12 months of data, GRESB time coverage will be 100% because the outer range spans the full year. This follows Scaler's interpretation to maximize your coverage within GRESB's constraint of allowing only one time range per resource per asset.
Do I need to create placeholder meters for categories I can't monitor?
Yes, if the connection exists. Placeholder meters ensure your GRESB area coverage accurately represents your data collection situation. Without them, GRESB area coverage would incorrectly suggest you're monitoring more than you actually are.
Can I adjust GRESB-aligned data coverage if it doesn't reflect my actual data quality?
GRESB-aligned data coverage follows GRESB's prescribed methodology and cannot be manually adjusted. However, you can work with Account Operations to adjust meter configurations or create placeholder meters to better represent your data collection situation within GRESB's constraints.
Why do I need both GRESB-aligned and Scaler data coverage?
GRESB-aligned data coverage shows what you're reporting to GRESB for scoring and benchmarking. Scaler data coverage tells you if your underlying meter data is actually complete. You need both: one for external reporting, one for quality assurance.