IFRS S2, ESRS and TCFD crosswalk
Scope of this page
What it covers. A requirement-level mapping between IFRS S2, the European Sustainability Reporting Standards, and the TCFD recommendations, organised by the four pillars the three share. 82 mapped requirements in total, plus the points where the standards genuinely diverge rather than merely differ in wording.
Where it comes from. The IFRS S2 to ESRS pairs are reproduced from Table 2.1 of the ESRS-ISSB Standards Interoperability Guidance, published jointly by the IFRS Foundation and EFRAG. The TCFD column follows the ISSB's own comparison of IFRS S2 with the TCFD recommendations. Nothing here is our own mapping.
What it deliberately omits. There is no GRI column. No requirement-level mapping between IFRS S2 and the GRI Standards has been jointly published by the two bodies, and inventing one would make this table less useful, not more. Where a mapping is partial the Notes column says so in the words of the source rather than forcing a one-to-one match.
Not a compliance shortcut. A mapped pair means the two requirements address the same subject. It does not mean satisfying one satisfies the other. Read both.
How to read the table
Each row is one IFRS S2 requirement. The ESRS column lists every ESRS provision the interoperability guidance pairs with it, which is often more than one, because the two standards cut the same subject differently. The TCFD column names the recommended disclosure the requirement descends from.
Where the source records a caveat, it appears in its own row directly beneath the mapping. A caveat tagged Partial is one where the guidance itself records a difference rather than a match. Those are the rows worth reading closely: they are where an entity reporting under both regimes has to make a decision rather than reuse a disclosure.
The rows stay in paragraph order, because that is the order you will be working through the standard in. Each row has its own anchor, so you can link to a single mapping. On a narrow screen the tables scroll sideways.
The crosswalk
Governance 9 requirements
Nine requirements. This is the closest of the four pillars: every IFRS S2 governance requirement has an ESRS 2 counterpart, and the ISSB records IFRS S2 as broadly consistent with both TCFD governance disclosures, differing only by asking for more detail.
| IFRS S2 | ESRS | TCFD recommended disclosure |
|---|---|---|
IFRS S2.6(a)# | ESRS 2.22(a) | Governance a) board oversight |
IFRS S2.6(a)(i)# | ESRS 2.22(b) | Governance a) |
IFRS S2.6(a)(ii)# | ESRS 2.23 | Governance a) |
| IFRS S2 requires more detail than TCFD, including how responsibilities are reflected in terms of reference, mandates and role descriptions. | ||
IFRS S2.6(a)(iii)# | ESRS 2.26(a) | Governance a) |
IFRS S2.6(a)(iv)# | ESRS 2.26(b) | Governance a) |
IFRS S2.6(a)(v)IFRS S1.21(b)# | ESRS 2.22(d)ESRS 2.29(b)-(c)ESRS E1.13ESRS 1.124 | Governance a) |
IFRS S2.6(b)# | ESRS 2.22(c) | Governance b) management role |
IFRS S2.6(b)(i)# | ESRS 2.22(c)(i) | Governance b) |
IFRS S2.6(b)(ii)# | ESRS 2.22(c)(iii) | Governance b) |
Strategy 37 requirements
The largest pillar and the one with the most partial matches: four of the six in this crosswalk sit here. They cluster around time horizons, quantified financial effects and scenario analysis inputs.
| IFRS S2 | ESRS | TCFD recommended disclosure |
|---|---|---|
IFRS S2.10(a)# | ESRS 2.48(a) | Strategy a) risks and opportunities |
| IFRS S2 additionally requires reference to industry-based guidance. | ||
IFRS S2.10(b)# | ESRS E1.18 | Strategy a) |
IFRS S2.10(c)# | ESRS 2.48(e) | Strategy a) |
| Partial IFRS S2.10(c) covers the time horizons over which risks and opportunities occur; ESRS 2.48(e) covers the horizons over which their anticipated financial effects occur. Aligned only where those horizons are the same. | ||
IFRS S2.10(d)# | ESRS 1.77(a)-(c)ESRS 1.78ESRS 1.80ESRS E1.AR11(b)ESRS 2.9(a)-(b) | Strategy a) |
| Partial IFRS S2 has no fixed definition of time horizon; ESRS 1.77-78 give standardised definitions, with deviation allowed under ESRS 1.80. | ||
IFRS S2.12# | ESRS 1.10ESRS 1.11ESRS 1.30(a)ESRS 1.130ESRS 1.131(b) | Strategy a) |
IFRS S2.13(a)# | ESRS 2.48(b) | Strategy b) impact on business and strategy |
IFRS S2.13(b)# | ESRS 2.48(a) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(a)(i)# | ESRS 2.47ESRS 2.48(b)ESRS E1.AR8(b) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(a)(ii)# | ESRS 2.68(b)ESRS E1.26ESRS E1.28ESRS E1.AR31 | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(a)(iii)# | ESRS 2.68(b)ESRS E1.26ESRS E1.28ESRS E1.AR31 | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(a)(iv)# | ESRS E1.14ESRS E1.16(a)-(i)ESRS E1.AR2-AR5ESRS 2.69(a)-(b) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(a)(v)# | ESRS 2.68(a)-(e)ESRS 2.69(a)-(c)ESRS E1.26-27 | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(b)# | ESRS 2.69(a)-(c)ESRS E1.26 | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.14(c)# | ESRS E1.16(j)ESRS 2.68(e) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.15(a)# | ESRS 2.48(d) | Strategy b) financial planning |
IFRS S2.16(a)# | ESRS 2.48(d)ESRS Annex II Table 2 | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.15(b)# | ESRS 2.48(e) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.16(b)# | ESRS 2.48(d) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.16(c)(i)-(ii)# | ESRS 2.48(e) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.16(d)# | ESRS 2.48(e) | Strategy b) |
IFRS S2.17# | ESRS E1.AR70(a)ESRS E1.AR73(a)ESRS E1.AR74(a) | Strategy b) |
| Partial IFRS S2.17 permits a single amount or a range; ESRS E1 permits a range only in specified circumstances. | ||
IFRS S2.22(a)# | ESRS E1.19 | Strategy c) resilience |
IFRS S2.22(a)(i)# | ESRS E1.19(c)ESRS E1.AR8 | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(a)(ii)# | ESRS E1.19(c)ESRS E1.AR8(a) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(a)(iii)(1-3)# | ESRS E1.19(c)ESRS E1.AR8(b) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)# | ESRS E1.19(a)-(c)ESRS E1.AR13(d) | Strategy c) scenario analysis |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(1)# | ESRS E1.AR13(a) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(2)# | ESRS E1.21ESRS E1.AR11(d)ESRS E1.AR12(c) | Strategy c) |
| Partial ESRS E1.AR12(c) requires consideration of at least a Paris-consistent scenario; IFRS S2 asks whether a scenario aligned with the latest international agreement was used. | ||
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(3)# | ESRS E1.21ESRS E1.AR11(d)ESRS E1.AR12(c) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(4)# | ESRS E1.20(c)(i)ESRS E1.AR12(c) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(5)# | ESRS E1.AR13(b) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(6)# | ESRS E1.AR13(b)ESRS E1.AR7(b) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(i)(7)# | ESRS E1.19(a)ESRS E1.AR13(d)ESRS E1.AR6 | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(ii)# | ESRS E1.AR13(c)-(d) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.22(b)(iii)# | ESRS E1.19(b) | Strategy c) |
IFRS S1.23IFRS S1.B42(c)# | ESRS E1.AR15ESRS 1.90ESRS 1.123-129 | Strategy c) |
IFRS S2.23# | ESRS 1.131(b)ESRS 1.130ESRS 1.11ESRS 1.30(a) | Strategy c) |
Risk management 10 requirements
Ten requirements, mapping mainly to ESRS 2.53. Note that IFRS S2.25(a)(iv) requires prioritisation of climate-related risks relative to other risk types, which is a specific instruction rather than a general one.
| IFRS S2 | ESRS | TCFD recommended disclosure |
|---|---|---|
IFRS S2.25(a)# | ESRS E1.20ESRS E1.22ESRS E1.23ESRS E1.24 | Risk Management a) identification and assessment |
IFRS S2.25(a)(i)# | ESRS 2.53(g) | Risk Management a) |
IFRS S2.25(a)(ii)# | ESRS E1.21 | Risk Management a) |
IFRS S2.25(a)(iii)# | ESRS 2.53(c)(ii) | Risk Management a) |
IFRS S2.25(a)(iv)# | ESRS 2.53(c)(iii) | Risk Management a) |
| Prioritisation of climate risks relative to other risk types. | ||
IFRS S2.25(a)(v)# | ESRS 2.53(e)ESRS 2.53(c)ESRS 2.65(a) | Risk Management b) managing |
IFRS S2.25(a)(vi)# | ESRS 2.53(h) | Risk Management a) |
IFRS S2.25(b)# | ESRS 2.53(c)ESRS E1.20(c)ESRS E1.65(a)ESRS E1.19(b)-(c)ESRS E1.24 | Risk Management a) |
IFRS S2.25(c)# | ESRS 2.53(e)-(f) | Risk Management c) integration |
IFRS S2.26# | ESRS 1.QC17ESRS 1.115 | Risk Management c) |
Metrics and targets 26 requirements
The pillar where the two sets of standards are closest in substance and furthest apart in structure: cross-industry metrics in IFRS S2.29 are spread across ESRS E1 and ESRS 2.
| IFRS S2 | ESRS | TCFD recommended disclosure |
|---|---|---|
IFRS S2.29(a)(i)(1-2)# | ESRS E1.44(a)-(b) | Metrics and Targets b) Scope 1 and 2 |
IFRS S2.29(a)(i)(3)IFRS S2.B38-B57# | ESRS E1.44(c)ESRS 1.62-67ESRS 1.QC5ESRS 1.69ESRS E1.AR39(b)ESRS E1.AR46(g) | Metrics and Targets b) Scope 3 |
| Both give priority to direct measurement: IFRS S2.B43 and B47 require prioritising direct measurement; ESRS 1.69 requires reasonable effort to collect value chain data before estimating. | ||
IFRS S2.29(a)(ii)# | ESRS 1.62ESRS E1.AR39(a) | Metrics and Targets b) |
| IFRS S2 requires measurement under the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard (2004) unless a jurisdictional authority or exchange requires another method. | ||
IFRS S2.29(a)(iii)(1-3)# | ESRS E1.AR39(b)ESRS 2.77(a)ESRS 2.80(i) | Metrics and Targets b) |
IFRS S2.29(a)(iv)# | ESRS E1.50 | Metrics and Targets b) |
| Disaggregation of Scope 1 and Scope 2. | ||
IFRS S2.29(a)(v)IFRS S2.B30IFRS S2.B31# | ESRS E1.49ESRS E1.49(a)ESRS E1.AR45(d) | Metrics and Targets b) |
IFRS S2.29(a)(vi)(1)IFRS S2.B32# | ESRS E1.51ESRS E1.AR45(c)ESRS E1.AR46(c)ESRS E1.AR46(i) | Metrics and Targets b) |
IFRS S2.29(a)(vi)(2)# | ESRS 1.131(b)ESRS E1.AR46(b) | Metrics and Targets b) |
| Financed emissions. See also the Category 15 relief in IFRS S2.29A. | ||
IFRS S2.29(b)# | ESRS E1.67(a) and (e) | Metrics and Targets a) |
| Partial ESRS E1.67(a) requires the amount before considering mitigation or adaptation actions; IFRS S2 does not state before or after. | ||
IFRS S2.29(c)# | ESRS E1.66(a) and (d) | Metrics and Targets a) |
| Partial , on the same basis as IFRS S2.29(b). | ||
IFRS S2.29(d)# | ESRS E1.64(c) | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.29(e)# | ESRS E1.16(c) and (e)-(f)ESRS E1.AR4 | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.29(f)# | ESRS E1.62ESRS E1.63(a) and (c) | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.29(g)(i)# | ESRS 2.29(c)ESRS E1.13 | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.29(g)(ii)# | ESRS E1.13 | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.31IFRS S2.B65(e)IFRS S1.21(b)# | ESRS E1.AR78ESRS 1.123-129 | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S1.50(c)# | ESRS 2.77(b) | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.32# | ESRS 1.131(b) | Metrics and Targets a) |
IFRS S2.33# | ESRS 2.79ESRS 2.80ESRS E1.30ESRS E1.34 | Metrics and Targets c) targets |
IFRS S2.33(a)IFRS S2.B67# | ESRS 2.79(a)ESRS 2.80(b) | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(b)# | ESRS 2.80(a)ESRS E1.33 | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(c)# | ESRS 2.80(c) | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(d)# | ESRS 2.80(e)ESRS E1.34(d) | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(e)# | ESRS 2.80(d)ESRS E1.34(c)ESRS E1.AR25 | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(f)# | ESRS 2.80(e) | Metrics and Targets c) |
IFRS S2.33(g)# | ESRS 2.80(b)ESRS E1.34(a)ESRS E1.AR23 | Metrics and Targets c) |
Where the standards actually diverge
Most differences between IFRS S2 and ESRS are differences of structure. These four are differences of substance, in the sense that an entity applying both has to do something specific rather than simply present the same information twice.
Carbon credits
IFRS S2.36(e) requires disclosure of planned use of carbon credits and, at 36(e)(ii), the third-party scheme that will verify or certify them. ESRS define carbon credits as instruments issued and verified against recognised quality standards (ESRS Annex II), and ESRS E1.59(a) requires the total verified and cancelled in the period. ESRS E1.56(b) treats carbon credits as relating only to reductions or removals OUTSIDE the value chain, with separate requirements for removals inside it. IFRS S2 draws no such distinction.
Quantitative information
IFRS S2.17 permits a single amount or a range. ESRS E1 permits a range only in the circumstances at AR70(a), AR73(a) and AR74(a). An entity applying both should give a single amount unless ESRS E1 permits a range.
Assets at risk
ESRS E1.66 and E1.67 require amounts before considering mitigation or adaptation actions. IFRS S2.29(b)-(c) does not state whether the amount is before or after.
Time horizons
ESRS 1.77-78 give standardised time-horizon definitions, with deviation permitted under ESRS 1.80. IFRS S2.10(d) requires an entity to explain how it defines short, medium and long term and how those link to its planning horizons.
On the TCFD column
The TCFD disbanded in 2023 and the IFRS Foundation took over monitoring companies' progress on climate-related disclosures. The recommendations still matter for a practical reason: a great deal of existing reporting, internal process documentation and board reporting was built against them, and IFRS S2 was drafted to sit on top of that structure rather than replace it.
The ISSB's comparison uses the phrase broadly consistent with throughout, and then notes separately where IFRS S2 requires more detail or requires something TCFD did not. That is the right way to read the column here. An entity that reported against TCFD has the skeleton of an IFRS S2 disclosure, not a finished one. The gaps are concentrated in the same places as the partial rows above: quantified financial effects, scenario analysis inputs, and Scope 3.
Related references
For which of these regimes applies to you and from when, see IFRS S2 adoption by jurisdiction. For the defined terms used in the paragraph references above, see the IFRS S2 terminology reference. For the reliefs that change what you have to file in year one, see IFRS S2 transition reliefs. The who signs off climate disclosure post walks through the Governance pillar in prose.
How to cite this page
Auditably Research. "IFRS S2, ESRS and TCFD crosswalk." Auditably.
https://auditably.co/blog/ifrs-s2-esrs-tcfd-crosswalk (accessed [date]).
Every row links back to a published source. If you believe a pairing is wrong or the guidance has been updated, email [email protected] with the paragraph reference and it will be checked against the source and corrected.