Disclosure Isn’t Just About Saving the Planet, It’s a Business Necessity Now, Says CDP Chief

BAKU, Azerbaijan—With more than 23,000 companies representing some $6.4 trillion of purchasing power reporting their emissions through CDP, the not-for-profit charity formerly known as the Carbon Disclosure Project is one of the leading names within the corporate sustainability space.

The U.K.-based nonprofit, which has been operating since 2000, was set up to encourage companies to disclose their environmental impact, including their carbon footprint, water usage and effects on forests and nature.

But amid a recent backlash against environmental, social and corporate governance initiatives, and as clean-energy stocks have slumped this year, concerns are growing over how important climate and sustainability reporting has become to companies. Greenhushing, the idea of companies pursuing climate plans without announcing them, has become a common practice, mainly because they fear being called out for greenwashing.

But, according to CDP Chief Executive Sherry Madera, these doubts should be put aside. A growing requirement for mandatory reporting, improved data and companies’ willingness to engage with supply chains are all signs that corporate engagement with climate and sustainability is still top of mind.

WSJ Pro Sustainable Business spoke to Madera at COP29 in Baku to discuss corporate engagement with climate and the push for company disclosures. The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

WSJ: How will the Trump victory affect company policy around disclosures?

Madera: Climate change doesn’t start and stop with elections—and neither does climate action. Leading companies aren’t waiting to be told what to do; they’re already disclosing climate data because they know transparency equals opportunity. With 86% of the S&P 500 now voluntarily disclosing, it’s clear: U.S. companies aspiring to be global leaders understand that climate action is no longer optional—it’s a necessity. Regardless of shifting political landscapes, the competitive advantage is undeniable: those who act now will secure access to capital, reduce risks and lead in efficiency. The future isn’t just about compliance; it’s about staying ahead in a global economy where sustainability defines success. Any administration that cares about the economy has to care about data, science and climate.

WSJ: How can you encourage the private sector to disclose more climate and supply-chain data?

Madera: CDP is 24 years old. So the idea of surfacing information for investors, customers, economists and government regulators to take action on climate is not new for us. But it’s really come into its own in the last few years when disclosures became mandatory in many places around the world or have been signposted to be mandatory in the next few years.

I think that there’s a real shift in thinking about just setting targets versus now implementation. If we find ways of making sure that the money flows to more sustainable investment options, I think that really underpins what we as economies are trying to do.

There’s a lot of talk about the pushback, but the data doesn’t show that for us. So year-on-year we’re growing at about 24% voluntary disclosures from companies worldwide and that includes countries that don’t have a mandatory disclosure plan in place, i.e. the U.S.

Businesses are willing [to disclose] not because they necessarily have the primary directive of saving the planet but they’re willing to share information and to disclose data because it’s a business necessity now.

WSJ: How do you see corporate disclosures evolving over the next few years?

Madera: I see more mandatory disclosure is coming into place around the world and I think that’s a great thing. CDP has been encouraging this for decades so that’s great with the qualifier that says actually harmonising what is being asked for from a mandatory perspective is advantageous.

The reality is if you look at principles, frameworks, standards and data, the data is quite consistent and it’s just about making sure you’re mapping it and tagging that data so it doesn’t need to be written multiple times. And that efficiency I think is going to be really important because essentially every dollar you spend on reporting is a dollar you can’t spend on action and that doesn’t seem right.

WSJ: Do you see the role of the chief sustainability officer evolving and becoming more aligned with the chief financial officer? Would that be a good thing?

Madera : I think it’s a good thing. The CFO needs to be convinced that there is value in investing in servicing this information, in disclosing and being transparent. So being closely linked to other elements of the business, particularly the CFO who really has a say on the money that’s being spent.

CDP works with over 300 of the world’s largest supply chain owners and they’re very keen on looking at their scope 3. Not because they just want to report on it, but because they want to actually dig into the data so that they can work with their supply chain to find out ways that they can lower their emissions.

A great example of this is Walmart. So the Walmart gigaton project is something that CDP was closely involved in setting up and they came in and then the project was to lower emissions by a gigaton in about 15 years and they came in and achieved that six years early and they did that because they looked at the data from their supply chain and they actively engaged with those members and supply chain in order to be able to help them change their energy mix, helping them to find renewables as an alternative.

WSJ: With fewer companies expected to attend COP this year, how will you encourage more of them to disclose?

Madera: I have the luxury of speaking to many international corporations as well as private companies and the main thing they say to me is they want clear policy because that allows them to have very clear steer on how it is that they can build their business to be a sustainable business.

What I would hope we can see more of particularly starting now and going all the way through to COP30 in Brazil, is that deeper engagement of companies that are working within these jurisdictions to be able to know really clearly what it is that they are going to be asked to contribute to those national goals and be an important part of them.

WSJ: Do governments influence company climate policy?

Madera: In 2024, I think over 70% of the world’s population has gone, or will go to the polls and obviously climate isn’t the only issue, but it is one of the issues in various places around the world.

Businesses do want clear signposting in terms of policies and in terms of government support or encouragement. More companies are continuing to disclose to ensure that they’re competitive.

But they’re also tending to be quieter about it than they were a couple of years ago. Before they were proudly screaming from the rooftops that they were transparent, and they were setting targets and they were making progress and these are their transition plans. What we’re finding is that they’re disclosing the data, but they’re doing so with less fanfare and less engagement with us to try and promote themselves.

So they’re keeping their heads below the parapets, it doesn’t mean that the data is not there and it’s not moving.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.