Certigence vs Persefoni — CSRD vs TCFD: Different Tools for Different Mandates

Feature comparison

Based on publicly available information about each vendor's offering, which may change. Spotted something out of date? Let us know at [email protected].

Where Certigence has the advantage

• Built for EU CSRD, not US SEC disclosure: Certigence follows ESRS standards required under CSRD. If you are a European company with a CSRD obligation, Persefoni's TCFD/SEC-optimised architecture is misaligned with your regulatory reality.
• Double materiality at the core: CSRD requires a double materiality assessment before you can determine what to report. Certigence has a dedicated wizard for this. Persefoni has no equivalent.
• Accessible pricing for mid-market companies: Persefoni is priced for financial sector enterprises. Certigence offers a free tier and affordable paid plans — making it accessible to SMEs and mid-market companies with CSRD obligations.

Where Persefoni has the advantage

We believe in honest comparisons. Here is where Persefoni genuinely outperforms Certigence:

• Market leader for financial sector carbon management: Persefoni is a dominant platform for banks, asset managers, and insurers managing financed emissions under TCFD, PCAF, and SEC climate rules.
• Deep GHG Protocol methodology: For companies with complex Scope 3 category 15 (investments) calculations, Persefoni's methodology depth is hard to match.

Which should you choose?

Persefoni is the right choice for US-listed companies or financial institutions managing TCFD, SEC, or PCAF compliance. If you are a European company subject to CSRD — or preparing for it — Persefoni lacks the ESRS framework and double materiality tooling you need. Certigence was built for exactly this regulatory context.

Choose Certigence if you have EU CSRD reporting obligations. Choose Persefoni if you are a financial institution managing TCFD, SEC, or PCAF climate disclosures.

• Persefoni alternatives
• Pricing
• All comparisons