No comparable basis
Buildings assessed by different consultants with different methods produce numbers that can't be ranked. The portfolio conversation resets to anecdotes.
Portfolio and sustainability teams need a comparable basis across the estate — not a pile of per-building reports in different formats. SolaMaxa ranks assets on the same explainable scale, and is honest about where the data isn't there yet.
Buildings assessed by different consultants with different methods produce numbers that can't be ranked. The portfolio conversation resets to anecdotes.
When a building hasn't been analysed, its contribution quietly becomes zero in the roll-up — or worse, a placeholder number that nobody can audit later.
Displacement figures that can't state their grid factor or generation basis don't survive a sustainability review — and shouldn't.
Per-building tools produce per-building reports. Aggregating them into an estate view means a spreadsheet — and a new one every quarter.
Portfolio screening ranks every asset on the same Opportunity Score and data-confidence basis — analysis-ready assets ranked, assets missing analysis shown as exactly that.
Unavailable values are excluded from sums and shown with coverage — "17 of 22 assets analysed" — never treated as zero. Mixed currencies are never silently merged.
Operational grid-displacement estimates carry the emission factor's provenance — with the boundary stated: operational displacement, not a full embodied-carbon LCA.
An opportunity matrix across score and data confidence separates buildings to prioritise from buildings that need data first — with CSV export for the wider team.
Portfolio screening consumes each asset's authoritative persisted analysis. When an asset's analysis changes, the screening run is flagged for re-run — frozen history stays frozen.