How to Improve Your GRESB Score with Energy Attribute Certificates (EACs): Renewable Procurement for GRESB EN1

If you are trying to improve a real estate fund's GRESB score with Energy Attribute Certificates (EACs) , the awkward truth is that EAC procurement is a skill that should be mastered now to build a future-proof strategy for GRESB. Depending on how EACs are used, they matter both less, and more , than most teams might expect - you'll need to play them carefully and in combination with other factors to maximise their impact. In this article, we'll unpack a commercially digestible approach in full, so you leave with an actionable understanding of how GRESB and EACs interact. Quickly, let's glance at EAC usage for GRESB at a high level:

• EACs matter less , because the 2026 GRESB Real Estate Standard only gives you one direct scoring lever here: they can help towards the renewable-energy portion of indicator EN1, worth 3 points, while location-based Scope 2 remains the scored emissions method. GRESB hasn't yet completely moved to dual-reporting (including market-based figures alongside location-based figures), which the GHG protocol currently mandates in markets utilising contractual instruments (which in this context mainly means EACs and EAC-backed supply arrangements). Rather, GRESB is collecting market-based renewable-energy claim data but maintaining location-based emissions figures for the final GHG score.
• EACs matter more , because GRESB has now added procurement-type fields for unbundled EACs and also allows participants to select financial or virtual PPAs - instruments that are typically structured to include EAC transfer. Moreover, this article shows that GRESB is likely using this addition in order to gather market data that will inform future scoring updates.

We tackle the question of how a corporate real estate manager can and should actually use certificates in 2026. The simple answer: use them to secure the available EN1 renewable points now , but build the internal processes to structure your ongoing EAC procurement as if quality differentiation is coming next - because it most likely is, based on a few clues and intuition - more below.

Right now: What part of GRESB do EACs actually improve today?

EACs were already very relevant to GRESB renewable energy reporting well before 2026. The 2026 change did not make EACs usable for the first time; it only clarified and expanded how certain procurement structures, especially financial/virtual PPAs and other unbundled EAC procurement strategies, are reported. EACs continue to most directly impact GRESB by increasing the percentage of renewable electricity reported in EN1. That means RECs , GOs , REGOs, and I-RECS and other valid instruments can help on the renewable-energy sub-score. However, EACs won't directly improve the scored greenhouse-gas metric because GRESB still scores location-based emissions, not market-based ones. (If you're looking to understand that critical distinction, read our article on the topic here ).

Regarding EN1, EACs cannot by themselves guarantee the full 3 points. They fall under "off-site procurement", as EN1 scoring splits the 3 points up as follows:

• Part One: 1 point for "Renewable Energy Generation". Here, you can get 1/1 points only if the asset(s) being reported are generating their own, on-site energy. You'll only ever get 0.5/1 points if the asset(s) being reported did not generate on-site renewable energy, but did generate or procure off-site renewable energy. Procuring and retiring/cancelling EACs is the far more practical route to meeting the off-site renewable-energy requirement, provided the retirement or cancellation evidence matches the relevant consumption period and meets GRESB's evolving eligibility requirements.
• Part Two: 2 points for "Renewable Energy Performance Improvement". This category assesses the current year's percentage of renewable energy and also looks at year-on-year improvement, although at 100% renewable energy consumed, the improvement factor no longer applies, a direct result of how the Part Two formula is constructed.

Therefore, using off-site EACs alone (meaning, purchased attributes, excluding attributes issued for on-site generation), whether unbundled or bundled, can bring a maximum of 2.5 points. To get the final missing 0.5 point, every asset in the relevant scoring group must generate on-site renewable energy.

What a defensible GRESB EAC strategy needs:

Now we've established that EACs help unlock points within EN1 and contribute to a healthy narrative about renewable energy usage, strengthening overall EN1 renewable-energy reporting. You just need to ensure the following when retiring Energy Attribute Certificates (EACs) :

• You're matching against asset-level electricity data, also ensuring that is correctly split across landlord- and tenant-controlled areas
• Your EACs are matched to the right market and reporting year. Then, you're adding the cancellation statements to your evidence pack.
• You're ensuring explicit beneficiary naming that connects the claim to the reporting entity.
• As per GRESB's 2026 Standard Updates , you're selecting the right procurement type in the Asset Spreadsheet and Asset Portal - which now includes unbundled EAC procurement (recently added). As a separate note: This signals readiness from GRESB to begin assessing unbundled EACs on grounds of quality in the future.
• You're definitively and accurately specifying whether the claim is "bundled" or "unbundled" with the method of energy procurement. For financial/virtual PPA structures, their associated EACs get classed as unbundled, because they're handled separately from the physical electricity procurement - vPPAs are just a contract for difference (CfD).
• Well-kept internal evidence packs should be compiled ready for assurance, even if GRESB does not ask first. There's no harm in being ready, and all the risk in being caught unprepared. Proxy certificates (i.e., those that are not registry-backed, often issued by utility companies) are unlikely to hold up under audit.

2026 Changes: Why is low-quality EAC reporting a bad idea?

Because 2026 is, plainly a "low-scoring-impact" year with regards to the EN1 procurement-type changes. The new additions to the procurement-type fields are the following:

• Financial Power Purchase Agreement, also called financial/virtual PPA
• Unbundled procurement of Energy Attribute Certificates, or unbundled EACs

They do not carry direct scoring impact in 2026. Instead, and more interestingly,

GRESB is assessing how participants are using these EN1 categories, assessing the following:

• Proximity (" the spatial closeness between the point of generation and the point of consumption "), which is also an aspect considered by the GHG protocol with respect to geographic matching . GRESB has stated that it will align with the RE100's Technical Criteria regarding what constitutes a "market"
• Vintage (the period in which an EAC's underlying electricity was generated) which determines certificate eligibility under reporting frameworks and compliance schemes like Green-e and RE100 , suggesting GRESB might follow suit.

Think about why they are doing this, then look ahead: By combining this collected data, GRESB is enriching its market-based claim and procurement-type data without actually scoring those fields yet, which I personally see as an unmistakable signal that the market is currently being mapped before it is judged.

Remember, EACs are changing industry-wide, not just with GRESB

Currently, a fund that uses the cheapest unbundled certificates available may still collect the same EN1 renewable points as a fund using tighter, project-linked procurement of EACs. Yet there is not one serious sustainability framework moving in the direction of looser quality standards. RE100's technical criteria , SBTi's draft Net-Zero Standard V2 , and GRESB's own commentary all point toward stricter scrutiny of market matching, vintage discipline and renewable claim credibility. This lines up with other existing developments in the GHG reporting ecosystem, and GRESB is possibly waiting for more explicit signals from authoritative reviews, such as the current GHG protocol draft proposals and review period, although they may well act independently. The GHG Protocol is mid-revision, with Phase 1 consultation now closed and under review, Phase 2 (covering Scope 2/3 interactions) expected in H2 2026, and a final Scope 2 Standard targeted for late 2027, with a phased implementation if proposals are currently adopted.

The current play: Get well ahead of GRESB quality hikes

Back to GRESB: For real estate portfolios, EAC strategy should be treated as trust infrastructure. The practical play is to do two things at once:

1. Enjoy EACs Now: First, use cost-efficient certificates to lift the renewable electricity share in EN1 right now.
2. Prepare For More Strictness: Second, improve the quality of what you buy, so your team becomes comfortable reporting high-quality EAC usage evidence, and the quality of your reporting is familiar to GRESB when quality starts to matter in scoring.

Risk is real: Don't be fooled by the fact that the EN1 indicator is subject to automatic validation. Remember, GRESB is an organisation that operates to strict standards, and any misrepresentation of the EAC-backed renewable share in EN1 can lead to validation flags, corrections, and a lower EN1 renewable energy score overall (if the claim is eventually adjusted downward). GRESB also performs random audits and checks, so don't go solo if you can help it. If you cannot cleanly prove retirement, beneficiary, market, vintage, and asset mapping, do not report the claim as renewable in GRESB. Bad idea!

We're well versed in GRESB-aligned renewable procurement

Instead of being exposed to weak documentation outside their control, Soldera offers a cleaner interface to GRESB participants, enabling automatic EAC-related compliance for GRESB renewable energy needs. With a single upload, Soldera's platform can connect the consumption data from your GRESB-aligned facilities, providing documentation that will withstand an audit. Our marketplace lets teams source directly from 4000+ renewable energy producers, using a single account that is integrated with every EAC registry where available.

This is, put simply, the cleanest and most efficient procurement pathway on the market right now, allowing GRESB participants to keep their retirement evidence exportable and organised without entering the spreadsheet-and-PDF swamp. We're also keeping track of evolving, complex GRESB-level mandates and alignment with other standards, so as soon as documentation standards change, we ensure our EAC filtering processes are adapted appropriately, always aiming to provide you with the exact EACs necessary for your use case.