IFRS S2 — Target performance and trends

Q: For s2-35, what data points do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?

The page says to prepare four core datapoints: current versus target, direction of progress, change over time, and the reason for any gap. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.

Q: How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for s2-35 in practice?

Use it as a working sequence rather than a reference note: first identify the datapoints, then gather the supporting evidence, and then turn that into a draft. The page is designed to help you move from raw information to a disclosure-ready output.

Q: What should I include in the evidence pack for s2-35 if I want to be assurance-ready?

The page includes an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Build your pack around the disclosure data, the underlying source material, and anything that shows how the figures and narrative were prepared and checked.

Q: What are the five assurance claims I should verify for s2-35, and how do I use them?

The page provides five claim/risk/evidence checks to help you test the disclosure before assurance. Use them to confirm that the numbers, the explanation of movement, and the supporting documents line up.

Q: What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes on the s2-35 page, and how do I avoid them?

The page lists common gaps and mistakes so you can spot weak points before finalising the disclosure. In practice, use that list as a pre-submission review against your data, narrative, and evidence pack.

Q: How can I turn the s2-35 datapoints into a draft disclosure using the page's output section?

The draft-output section gives you visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a content-index line. That makes it easier to convert the prepared datapoints into a first draft without starting from a blank page.

Q: What is the synthetic example on the s2-35 page meant to show, and can I copy it into my report?

The example is explicitly synthetic and is there to show how a disclosure might look in practice, including a quantitative table where relevant. You should use it as a formatting and drafting aid, not as a template to copy without adapting it to your own data.

Q: How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for s2-35?

The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation steps, track the evidence you need, and support assurance readiness before you draft the disclosure.

Q: What is the printable Library Card for s2-35 for?

The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. It is a practical companion for keeping the disclosure points, evidence needs, and preparation steps in one place while you work.

Q: Can I use the 'From company reports' table to find real examples for s2-35?

Yes. The page links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed, so you can see how others have presented similar information in practice.

Disclosure focus

The practical focus is on the scope and consistency of what is being tracked. An organisation should make clear whether the reported performance covers all relevant operations, entities or activities, or only selected sites, business units or flagship locations. The aim is to help users judge how representative the trend is and whether the target performance reflects the organisation as a whole.

This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS source.

Prepare

What to collect before drafting

Tick each field as the evidence lands. Owners are the teams that usually hold the source files.

Current versus target
Performance management / reporting

Capture the latest measured result alongside the intended target so the reader can see how far the reported item sits from plan.

Evidence Use the source report or dashboard that shows the current figure and the agreed target in the same period.

Watch for The current figure is taken from one source and the target from another, so the comparison does not reconcile to the approved plan.
Direction of progress
Performance management / reporting

Capture whether the reported item is moving in the intended direction over time, using the same basis for each point in the sequence.

Evidence Use a time-series extract, management pack or tracker that shows the measure across successive periods.

Watch for Period-on-period movement is read from mixed bases, so the trajectory is distorted by a scope or period error.
Change over time
Performance management / reporting

Capture how the measure has shifted across the relevant periods so the pattern can be seen clearly and consistently.

Evidence Use a trend chart, ledger extract or KPI history that keeps the definition unchanged across the periods shown.

Watch for The trend is built from figures that use different definitions or reporting scopes, so the time series is not like-for-like.
Reason for gap
Performance management / reporting

Capture the specific cause of any difference between the reported result and the expected level, with enough detail to explain the gap.

Evidence Use the variance note, issue log or management commentary that records the agreed explanation for the shortfall or overshoot.

Watch for The explanation is written against the wrong period or the wrong measure, so the stated cause does not match the reported variance.

Before you start

Have you pinned down which target or targets this update covers, and which actual figures sit alongside them?
Are you clear on the time basis for the numbers — for example, the period end, cut-off date, and whether you are comparing like with like?
Can every figure be traced back to a source record or working paper that someone else could follow?
Have you agreed the definition you will use for the target, the actual result, and any gap between them?
Do you know which movement story you will tell — the direction of progress, the pattern over time, and any step-change or slowdown?
Have you identified the reasons behind any shortfall or overshoot, and are those explanations supported by evidence?

＋ Show s2-35 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)

How to prepare it

Set the reporting boundary first: decide which business units, sites, activities, and time period the disclosure will cover, so the figures and narrative are built on one clear scope.

Agree the meaning of each reported item before drafting: define what you will treat as the current position against the goal, the movement path, the pattern over time, and any gap or difference you need to explain.

Gather the support behind each item: pull together the working papers, source data, calculations, and management notes that show how each statement was reached.

Prepare the disclosure content in full: write the numbers or narrative for the current position versus the goal, the direction of travel, the trend, and the explanation for any shortfall or change.

Record any exclusions, assumptions, or methodology changes that affect the result, so a reviewer can see why the reported picture is what it is and whether it has shifted from prior periods.

Check the draft against the official source and internal evidence pack, confirming that the scope, definitions, figures, and explanations align before sign-off.

Request the data

Request the target tracking pack from Finance

Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.

How are the agreed targets tracking against actual results, what is the direction of travel, and what explains any gap or change?

Use your organisation’s own performance language first, then map it to the disclosure. For example, if your team talks about KPIs, scorecards, business plans, or management reporting, use those terms in the request and only translate them later for the sustainability report. Keep the ask practical and evidence-led; check the source material before sign-off.

Weak request

Please provide the disclosure wording for target performance and trends.

Why it fails: This asks for report language rather than the underlying management evidence. It does not say which internal pack, period, comparison basis, or commentary is needed, so the owner cannot tell what to pull or how to frame the data.

Better request

Please send the latest management pack for [business area] showing actuals against the approved target or plan for [period], plus the trend over time and the main reasons for any variance. Include the source system, version of the target used, and any notes the team already uses internally.

Formal email template

Subject: Request for target tracking data and commentary

Hi [Name],

Could you please send over the latest target tracking pack for [business area / metric family] for [reporting period]?

We need a clear view of:
- the latest actual result against the agreed target or plan;
- the direction of travel over the period;
- any trend notes that help explain whether performance is improving, flat, or weakening; and
- the main reasons for any gap between actual and target.

Please include the source file or system, the version of the target or plan used, the period covered, and any internal notes that explain the movement.

If helpful, you can use your normal management reporting format and we will map it for the sustainability disclosure. Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms and check the source material before sign-off.

Thanks,
[Your name]

Short Teams / Slack version

Hi [Name] — could you share the latest [scorecard / KPI pack / management report] for [business area] covering [period]? We need actual vs target, the trend over time, and the main reasons for any gap. Please include the source file/system and the version of the target used. Use your normal internal terms; we’ll map them later. Thanks.

Industry examples

Manufacturing

Context. A plant team tracks output, scrap, and on-time delivery against monthly operational targets.

Adapted request. Please share the latest plant scorecard for [site] covering [period], showing actual output against the approved plan, the month-by-month trend, and the reasons for any shortfall or improvement. Include the source system, the plan version, and any notes on downtime, yield, or delivery issues. Use your normal production terms; we will map them later and check the source before sign-off.

Example response. Prepared by: Site performance analyst; Reviewed by: Plant manager; Period: Apr–Jun 2026; Target version: June reforecast; Source: MES and monthly scorecard; Metric rows: output, scrap rate, on-time delivery; Commentary: downtime reduced in May, scrap improved after line change, June shortfall linked to maintenance outage.

Retail

Context. A trading team monitors sales, margin, and footfall against weekly and monthly targets.

Adapted request. Please send the latest trading report for [region / store group] for [period], showing actual sales against the agreed plan, the trend across the period, and the main reasons for any gap. Include the report version, the source dashboard, and notes on promotions, stock, or customer traffic. Use your usual trading language and we will translate it for the disclosure.

Example response. Prepared by: Trading analyst; Reviewed by: Regional manager; Period: Weeks 1–13 of Q2 2026; Target version: Approved trading plan v2; Source: Trading dashboard; Metric rows: sales, gross margin, footfall; Commentary: sales trend improved during promotion weeks, margin softened due to discounting, footfall dipped in two stores after local disruption.

Draft your disclosure

Notes that turn data into a disclosure

LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.

Method note

Explain what was measured, how the target or reference point was set, which periods are included, and any assumptions or estimation methods used to prepare the figures.

Context note

Set out what the numbers indicate about delivery against the intended level, including whether performance is improving, holding steady or moving away from plan.

Fluctuation statement

Describe the main operational, market or timing factors that caused the reported result to differ from the intended level, and note whether those factors are temporary or likely to continue.

Content index entry

s2-35 Target performance and trends — [location / page] / [notes]

Download Centre

Preparation tools & forms

Download preparation tools for s2-35 with free verified email access for 24 hours. Source-report links remain public.

Free · Email access

01XLSPrep & Assurance workbookDatapoints, risks, evidence to check, owner and evidence pack.Get it free ↧ 02XLSData-request packRequest email, message template, response fields and sign-off structure.Get it free ↧ 03PDFLibrary CardPrintable one-page summary of this disclosure card.Get it free ↧

Check

For each claim, check the evidence

We prepared the coverage figure from the underlying working papers and reconciled it to the source records before drafting the disclosure.
Risk The reported coverage may not tie back to the population actually reviewed, or exclusions may have been applied without a clear basis.
Evidence to check Population listing, reconciliation workbook, inclusion/exclusion log, and sign-off showing the final figure agrees to source records.
We used the same cut-off date and scope basis across the related figures so the comparison is internally consistent.
Risk Different dates, entities, or boundaries may have been mixed, making the comparison misleading.
Evidence to check Scope memo, reporting timetable, boundary decisions, and evidence that the same reporting period and entity set were used throughout.
We checked the underlying data for obvious gaps, duplicates, and unusual movements before publication.
Risk Errors in the source data may have flowed into the published figure without being detected.
Evidence to check Data quality checks, exception logs, query resolution notes, and evidence of follow-up on outliers or missing entries.
We kept support for the explanation of movement against the target, including the working assumptions used to describe the change.
Risk The explanation may be unsupported, overly general, or not aligned to the numbers shown.
Evidence to check Variance analysis, management commentary drafts, calculation sheets, and documents showing the assumptions behind the explanation.
We retained the evidence used to describe the direction of travel over time, including the trend review and the basis for the narrative.
Risk The trend statement may be selective, incomplete, or not backed by the underlying time-series data.
Evidence to check Multi-period dataset, trend analysis paper, charts or tables used in drafting, and review notes showing how the narrative was derived.

Evidence pack to prepare

The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosureA methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and preparedSource-system exports the figures or facts were drawn fromThe internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publicationMinutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation

Common reporting gaps

The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.

Where drafts go wrong

Mistakes to avoid and where judgement is needed

The left column is what preparers get wrong while collecting; the right column is where you will have to make and explain a judgement.

Mistakes to avoid

Wrong ownerThe request goes to the wrong team or person, so the figures are pulled from someone who does not hold the working records.
Framework language usedPeople ask for the data using reporting-framework terms instead of the business’s own labels, and the source team cannot match the request to its records.
Scope left vagueNo one agrees which business unit, activity, or target set is in scope, so different teams send different populations.
Wrong time basisThe data is taken for the wrong reporting period or cut-off date, which makes the comparison with the target line up incorrectly.
Mixed counting basisOne source counts items one way and another source counts them differently, so the combined dataset is not on a like-for-like basis.
Source labels lostOriginal file names, field names, or system tags are stripped away, so the team cannot trace each figure back to its starting record.
Separate groups mergedPopulations that should stay apart are rolled into one extract, which hides differences between target, actual, and trend data.
Evidence trail missingThe extract is saved without notes on where it came from, when it was pulled, or who checked it, so the audit trail is incomplete.
No sign-off recordThe final numbers are used before the owner has confirmed them in writing, leaving no clear approval trail for the working papers.

＋ Show 5 more

Judgement needed

Set the comparison base after a business changeIf a purchase, sale, or reorganisation changes the group you are tracking, explain whether you restated the starting point and later figures so the comparison stays like-for-like, or whether you kept the original base and described the break in continuity.
Choose one way to handle mixed country definitionsWhere local teams measure the same target differently, pick a single group-wide method for the report period, explain any conversion or alignment steps, and note any places where local practice still differs.
Decide how to treat borderline activities or peopleFor sites, products, customers, workers, or other populations that sit near the scope line, state the rule used to include or exclude them and disclose any material judgement where the boundary is not clear-cut.
Fix the timing basis for progress and trend linesIf performance is tracked on different dates, frequencies, or cut-off points across the business, say which date or period drives the reported comparison and explain any lag between operational tracking and the reported update.
Separate measured results from estimatesWhen some figures come from direct records and others from assumptions or sampling, identify which parts are estimated, explain the method used, and show whether the estimate could move the reported gap to target or the trend view.
Explain how rounding affects small movementsIf rounding changes the apparent distance to target or the shape of the trend, state the rounding basis used and make sure the narrative still matches the underlying numbers.
Aggregate sensitive data without hiding the patternWhere privacy or confidentiality means you cannot show detail for small groups, combine the data to a level that protects individuals, then explain the aggregation rule and any effect on the reported trend or variance.
Describe how you treat partial-period effectsIf an acquisition, disposal, or other change only affects part of the year, explain whether you include the full period, only the time in scope, or a normalised view, and make clear how that choice affects the actual-versus-target comparison.

＋ Show 4 more

Examples

How it reads on the page

Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — manufacturing

We compare our current-year outcome with the level we set at the start of the year, and the gap is explained by slower-than-planned efficiency gains in two plants.
- Our target was 120 units of output per unit of energy; we achieved 114, which is 95% of plan.
- The line of travel is improving: 108 in the prior year, 111 at mid-year, and 114 at year-end.
- Against the target, we are 6 units short; the shortfall narrowed from 12 units at mid-year, showing steady catch-up.
- The difference is mainly due to delayed equipment upgrades and a longer maintenance shutdown than expected.

This example shows how to present the current result against the planned level, describe the direction of movement over time, and explain why the outcome differs from plan, using simple figures that stay internally consistent.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — food retail

We set a year-end goal for reducing food waste, and our reported result sits close to that aim, with the remaining gap linked to store roll-out timing.
- The plan was to cut waste to 8.0 tonnes per £1m sales; we finished at 8.6, equal to 93% of the target level.
- The pattern has moved in the right direction: 9.8 last year, 9.1 at the half-year point, and 8.6 at year-end.
- The gap to plan is 0.6 tonnes per £1m sales, smaller than the 1.1 gap seen at mid-year.
- The main reason for the miss is that three stores joined the new process later than scheduled, so the full benefit arrived after year-end.

This example illustrates a plain-language comparison with the planned figure, a short trend view, and a brief explanation of the variance, all written as a synthetic disclosure.

Quality ladder

Basic
I am 62% of the way to my 2030 target.
Better
I am 62% of the way to my 2030 target, with the gap split across Scope 1, Scope 2 and selected Scope 3 measures.
Best
I am 62% of the way to my 2030 target at year-end 2025, measured against our 2020 baseline across Scope 1, Scope 2 and selected Scope 3 measures, and the slower-than-planned movement mainly reflects delayed supplier changes and lower-than-expected site efficiency gains.

Check your understanding

Scenarios to work through

A group has a 2030 emissions target and has reported this year’s result as 18% below the baseline, compared with 12% below baseline last year. The draft note also says the gap to target has narrowed, but it does not explain why.

QShould the narrative include both the current position against the target and a plain explanation of the change in the gap, or is the percentage alone enough?

Reveal model answer →

A preparer has two years of data showing steady improvement in energy intensity, but the latest quarter is worse than the prior quarter because a new site came online. Management wants to describe the latest quarter only, because it looks cleaner than the full-year pattern.

QShould the disclosure focus on the latest quarter, or should it also describe the broader direction of travel and the reason for the short-term setback?

Reveal model answer →

A company has a water-reduction target and the actual result is slightly ahead of plan. The team has prepared a chart, but the written commentary only says the target is being monitored and gives no view on whether progress is accelerating, slowing, or flat.

QDoes the commentary need to say more than the current result, and if so what should it add?

Reveal model answer →

A preparer is drafting the section on a methane target. The numbers show the organisation is 5% behind plan this year, but the team has not agreed whether the cause was operational disruption, a change in measurement, or both, and the draft leaves the shortfall unexplained.

QCan the disclosure leave the shortfall unexplained until next year, or should it set out the reason now?

Reveal model answer →

Real reports

How 3 companies report it

Examples of full and partial reporting practice. These are evidence-led reviews, not exact disclosure templates to copy.

Real published reports

Hang Lung Properties Limited

Partial

Real Estate · Hong Kong · 2025 · p.64 ↗

Hang Lung Properties Limited’s Sustainability Report 2025 provides detailed coverage of performance against each climate-related target, including an analysis of trends or changes in the entity’s performance, as shown on pages 220 and 234. The report also discloses the progress trajectory towards these targets on page 220. However, there is no evidence found regarding explanations for any variances between actual performance and targets.

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited

Partial

Retailing · India · 2025 · p.124 ↗

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited’s Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 provides evidence of actual performance against each climate-related target along with an analysis of trends or changes in the entity’s performance, as shown on page 112. The report also discusses climate-related risks and opportunities in its strategy and decision-making processes (p.110). However, there is no quotable evidence regarding the progress trajectory or explanations for variances between targets and actual performance.

SITC International Holdings Company Limited

Exact

Water Transportation · Hong Kong · 2025 · p.191 ↗

SITC International Holdings Company Limited’s 2025 Environmental, Social and Governance Report includes a trend analysis of performance against each climate-related target, with discussion of changes in the entity’s performance on page 198. The report references the metrics used to set climate-related targets on page 197, indicating some disclosure of target-setting methodology. However, clear disclosures on actual versus target performance and progress trajectory are unclear on page 197, and there is no evidence found regarding explanations for variances.

Field	Hang Lung Properties Limited	Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited	SITC International Holdings Company Limited
Current versus target	Not found	Not found	Partial
Direction of progress	Not found	Not found	Partial
Change over time	Not found	Not found	Not found
Reason for gap	Not found	Not found	Not found

Full evidence map with quotes and page numbers →

✓ Knowledge Hub AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop

Ask the Knowledge Hub AI Assistant about this disclosure

Get practical answers for your reporting context.

Try How do I prepare s2-35? What data do I need to collect? Where can I see a real-report example? What mistakes should I avoid?

Framework references

Relevant IFRS / ISSB requirements and related disclosures

IFRS / ISSB

s2-35

within IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures

Open official source →

Guides that settle this question

Are IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 Mandatory? →Can One Climate Dataset Support UK SRS S2, IFRS S2, ESRS E1, TCFD and CDP? →Climate risks, scenario analysis and resilience under IFRS S2 →First-Time Application of IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 →

Related & explore

More in IFRS S2 →Browse full catalogue →Search all disclosures →

FAQ

Questions this page answers

For s2-35, what data points do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?+

How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for s2-35 in practice?+

What should I include in the evidence pack for s2-35 if I want to be assurance-ready?+

What are the five assurance claims I should verify for s2-35, and how do I use them?+

What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes on the s2-35 page, and how do I avoid them?+

How can I turn the s2-35 datapoints into a draft disclosure using the page's output section?+

What is the synthetic example on the s2-35 page meant to show, and can I copy it into my report?+

How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for s2-35?+

What is the printable Library Card for s2-35 for?+

Can I use the 'From company reports' table to find real examples for s2-35?+

Is there a cross-framework reference for s2-35 that helps me reuse data for ESRS E1?+

	Report A	Report B	Report C
Datapoint 1	✓ p.213	unclear	✓ p.87
Datapoint 2	✓ p.214	—	✓ p.90

Target performance and trends

What to collect before drafting

Current versus target

Direction of progress

Change over time