Skip to the answer

Disclosure GuidesPillar guides, articles, FAQ and expert notes

Level 2 · Explainer·ESRS · Disclosure guides

ESRS Disclosure Matrix and Content Index: requirements, ARs, datapoints, owners, evidence, controls, assurance status and report locations

KNOWLEDGE HUB · TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Who this is for A 11-minute read for reporting teams working through Running the reporting cycle: governance, data and controls, and for reviewers testing whether the evidence behind it holds.

Published passport

Current as at 11 August 2026
RK Reviewed by Dr Ross KurinkoLinkedIn Strategic ESG Advisor · IFRS S1 & S2 / GRI / ESRS expert GRI Certified Global Trainer · PhD, University of Cambridge · ESG-AI expert 15+ years on FTSE 100 & Fortune Global 500 disclosures Canary Wharf, London LRA educational guidance · Not issued or endorsed by European Commission

Edition written against

LIMITATION: Educational technical guidance. It is not legal advice, an assurance opinion or a substitute for …

Published

12 Aug 2026

Knowledge Hub guide

Last reviewed

11 Aug 2026

Short answer

The answer, before the reasoning

The internal ESRS disclosure matrix is a control and assurance tool; the public ESRS content index is a reader-navigation output under IRO-2. The matrix should link each material IRO and topic to the relevant DRs, mandatory ARs and atomic datapoints, then to owners, evidence, methodology, controls, assurance status, drafting location and final page.

The public index lists the ESRS DRs complied with and their precise locations, identifying incorporated-by-reference and supplementary information. It is not equivalent to a GRI Content Index, which supports GRI-specific statements of use, material-topic and omission requirements. Version control is essential while revised digital deliverables are pending.

2026 REVISED ESRS · HOW-TO / TOOL GUIDE

ESRS Disclosure Matrix and Content Index: How to Map Requirements, Datapoints and Report Locations

A practical control model linking material IROs, DRs, ARs, datapoints, owners, evidence, assurance and final pages

ANSWER · EXPLAIN · APPLY · EVIDENCE · CONNECT · PUBLISH

© 2026 London Reporting Academy. Educational technical guidance.

In practice

Article / package ID LRA-ESRS2-003
Version 1.0
Technical review date 2 August 2026
Source basis Commission-adopted 2026 Revised ESRS

Technical status

TECHNICAL STATUS

Commission-adopted 2026 Revised ESRS (C(2026) 5010 final, 3 July 2026). As at 2 August 2026, the delegated act has not yet entered into force. It becomes legally effective only after completion of the scrutiny period and publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. The revised standards apply to financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2027. Early application for financial year 2026 is permitted once the delegated act enters into force. Until early adoption is validly made, the 2023 ESRS as amended remain the legally applicable standards for current reporting. Preparers should state clearly which version they use. EFRAG had not issued revised Implementation Guidance or an updated revised-ESRS datapoint list by 28 July 2026.

Quick orientation

Quick orientation

Applies to
Teams designing ESRS data requests, disclosure control, assurance traceability and final navigation.
Primary decision
Which fields and workflow are needed from IRO to final page.
Key sources
Revised ESRS 1 drafting/materiality conventions; Revised ESRS 2 IRO-2; GRI 1 Foundation 2021 for comparison.
Common confusion
Using one public index as if it were the internal control matrix, or claiming ESRS-GRI equivalence.

1. Three layers of mapping

An effective ESRS mapping system has three distinct layers. First, the materiality layer links each material impact, risk or opportunity to a topic or sub-topic. Second, the requirements layer links that topic to ESRS 2, GDR, topical DRs, mandatory ARs and any entity-specific information. Third, the reporting-control layer links each information request to an owner, source, methodology, evidence, control, assurance status and final report location.

The public content index required by IRO-2 is a much narrower output: it helps users locate the Disclosure Requirements with which the undertaking has complied. Confusing the public index with the internal matrix usually leaves important datapoint, evidence and control questions unmanaged.

Figure 1. End-to-end traceability from the IRO register to the public content index.

Rule

Version warning

The 2026 Revised ESRS text is available, but an updated EFRAG Implementation Guidance package and revised datapoint list were not yet available by 28 July 2026. Preparers should map from the adopted DRs and ARs and keep the mapping version under formal change control. A 2024 datapoint spreadsheet prepared for the 2023 ESRS should not be silently reused as the definitive 2026 list.

2. DRs, ARs and datapoints

REQUIREMENT In the revised drafting conventions, a Disclosure Requirement consists of one or more distinct datapoints. Mandatory DR language is signalled by formulations such as “shall disclose”, “shall report”, “shall describe” or “shall explain”, subject to information materiality. Application Requirements are mandatory and have the same authority as the main-body requirements; they support application and may also provide presentation options.

Source anchor: Revised ESRS 1, paragraphs 17-18.

A datapoint is best treated operationally as the smallest information request that can be assigned, evidenced, reviewed and located. One paragraph can therefore produce several matrix rows: a value, unit, methodology, source, estimate limitation, scope statement and comparative explanation may each need a distinct owner or evidence item.

REQUIREMENT The materiality filter is applied to information, not only to topics. Except for permitted supplementary information, the undertaking shall not report prescribed information that is not material and shall not include immaterial entity-specific information. A matrix should therefore record the information-materiality decision and rationale rather than treating every extracted datapoint as automatically reportable.

Source anchor: Revised ESRS 1, paragraphs 23-24.

In practice

3. Recommended disclosure-matrix fields

Field group Recommended fields Why it matters
Identity Matrix row ID; ESRS version; standard; DR; paragraph; AR; datapoint description. Creates a stable source anchor and prevents version mixing.
Materiality IRO ID; topic/sub-topic; impact/risk/opportunity; materiality dimension; information-materiality status; rationale. Shows why the information belongs in the statement.
Boundary and period Own operations/value chain; entity/geography; metric boundary; reporting period; time horizon. Prevents inconsistent scope between narrative, metrics and targets.
Ownership Disclosure owner; data owner; methodology owner; reviewer; approver. Makes preparation and review responsibilities explicit.
Evidence and method Source system/document; calculation; estimate/proxy; assumptions; limitations; evidence reference; retention location. Supports verifiability and assurance.
Control and assurance Control ID; control frequency; result; issue; remediation; assurance request/status. Connects reporting to the internal-control and assurance process.
Presentation Draft section; cross-reference; incorporation by reference; final page/paragraph; supplementary-information flag. Generates a reliable public content index.
Status and change Not started/in progress/ready; mapping version; change reason; last review; final freeze. Supports programme management and update control.

Rule

Implementation practice

Use stable IDs for IROs, requirements, datapoints, evidence and controls. Avoid using a page number as an identifier because pagination changes late in the reporting cycle.

4. Build the matrix in nine controlled steps

Lock the source set. Record the exact ESRS version, adoption or legal status, source document and extraction date.

Extract the DRs and mandatory ARs. Keep the original paragraph reference and a controlled paraphrase of the information request.

Connect the approved IRO register. Link each material topic or sub-topic to ESRS 2, GDR, topical DRs and entity-specific requirements.

Apply information materiality. Record “report”, “not material”, “not applicable”, “phase-in”, “relief” or another controlled status with rationale and approval.

Decompose each reportable requirement into assignable datapoints. Preserve conditions and exceptions in the same row or a linked field.

Assign owners and evidence. Identify source systems, documents, calculations, estimates, proxies, methodologies and retention locations.

Design controls and assurance traceability. Link prepare/review controls, reconciliations, issue logs and evidence-request status.

Map drafting and final locations. Record cross-references, incorporation by reference, supplementary information and precise final pages or paragraphs.

Freeze, reconcile and generate the public index. Re-run completeness, location, version and cross-reference checks after final pagination.

5. The ESRS content index under IRO-2

REQUIREMENT IRO-2 requires the undertaking to list the Disclosure Requirements with which it has complied and indicate where the related disclosures are located. The list can be tabular and may identify page or paragraph locations. Information incorporated by reference is separately identified. Supplementary information included in the sustainability statement should be distinguished so that users can tell what is reported to meet ESRS and what is additional.

Source anchor: Revised ESRS 2, IRO-2 paragraph 37(d) and AR 29.

The content index should be generated from the final controlled matrix. Hand-built page references are vulnerable to late layout changes, broken links and unreviewed cross-references.

In practice

Public-index field Recommended presentation
Standard and DR Use the official identifier and disclosure title.
Status Report only controlled terms that accurately reflect compliance, phase-in or other permitted treatment.
Location Give precise page, paragraph, table or incorporated-document location; list multiple locations where the disclosure is split.
Incorporation by reference Identify the source document and exact location and confirm the incorporation conditions are met.
Supplementary information Mark additional non-ESRS information clearly and ensure it does not obscure material ESRS information.
Version Retain internally even if not shown publicly; it is essential for review and future updates.

6. How the ESRS index differs from a GRI Content Index

Figure 2. Internal ESRS disclosure matrix, public ESRS content index and GRI Content Index compared.

REQUIREMENT Both ESRS and GRI use an index to help readers navigate reported information, but the reporting mechanisms differ. Under GRI 1: Foundation 2021, the GRI Content Index supports reporting in accordance with or with reference to the GRI Standards and includes the applicable statement of use, GRI 1 used, material topics, reported disclosures and locations, applicable Sector Standard information, and reasons for omission where relevant.

Source anchor: GRI 1: Foundation 2021, Requirement 7 and Appendices 1-2.

The Revised ESRS IRO-2 content index is a list of ESRS DRs complied with and their locations, with related treatment of incorporated-by-reference and supplementary information. An internal ESRS disclosure matrix is broader still and is not a public compliance statement. One dataset can support all three tools, but fields, claims and review criteria remain separate.

In practice

Question Internal ESRS matrix ESRS public index — GRI Content Index
Primary purpose Project, control and assurance traceability. Reader navigation to ESRS DRs. — GRI reporting mechanism and navigation.
IRO link Detailed and explicit. Usually indirect through the report structure. — Material topics are explicitly listed.
Datapoint detail Yes, as operational rows. Normally no; index is at DR/location level. — At disclosure level, with GRI-specific fields.
Owners/evidence/controls Yes. No. — No.
Reporting claim Internal status only. ESRS DR compliance/location. — Statement of use and GRI-specific reporting basis.

Hypothetical scenario

Illustrative scenario - water consumption datapoint

The undertaking has a material negative water impact at three sites and a related production-continuity risk. The matrix links the IRO IDs to the water topic, ESRS 2 GDR-M, the relevant topical water DR and AR, and an entity-specific basin-context metric. One matrix row assigns the absolute water-consumption value to the environmental data owner. A second row assigns the methodology and source systems to the calculation owner. A third row records that 12% of one site’s value is estimated using production volumes and an approved intensity factor, with the limitation and improvement action. A fourth row maps the basin-context narrative to the sustainability team and the external water-stress dataset. Each row has its own evidence reference and review control. The public content index does not reproduce these rows. It lists the relevant DR and points to the report page containing the metric and methodology. The internal matrix retains the assurance trail.

Illustrative only. It shows how the decision is made, not wording that can be copied or relied on.

In practice

7. Hypothetical matrix example

Matrix row Controlled information request Owner / evidence — Final location
WAT-M-01 Report water-consumption value and unit for the defined boundary. Environmental data owner; meter extract and consolidation file. — Water metrics table, p. XX.
WAT-M-02 Describe calculation method, source inputs and significant assumptions. Methodology owner; approved calculation note. — Methodology note, p. XX.
WAT-M-03 Explain estimate and limitation for Site C and planned data-quality improvement. Site C owner; estimate memo and meter-installation approval. — Limitations paragraph, p. XX.
WAT-C-01 Provide context on basin conditions needed to interpret the metric. Sustainability team; external basin dataset and site assessment. — Water context, p. XX.

In practice

8. Common mistakes

Mistake Why it happens Correction
Treating the 2023 datapoint spreadsheet as the final 2026 source Teams want a ready-made list before revised guidance is issued. Map from the adopted 2026 text, record provisional extraction and update when official digital deliverables are released.
Marking every datapoint mandatory The topic-materiality and information-materiality filters are ignored. Record the materiality status and decision rationale for each information request.
Ignoring mandatory ARs Only bold DR headings are extracted. Map relevant ARs and their conditions with the same source discipline.
No IRO connection The matrix becomes a checklist detached from the DMA. Make IRO ID and topic/sub-topic mandatory fields.
One owner for an entire DR Narrative, metric, method and evidence often come from different teams. Decompose into assignable datapoints and assign prepare/review roles.
Evidence only at document level A policy or workbook is stored without identifying the supporting section or cell. Use evidence IDs and precise references to the claim or datapoint.
Page location entered too early Late pagination makes the index unreliable. Use stable section IDs during drafting and insert final pages after freeze.
Calling the matrix a GRI Content Index Similar navigation purpose is mistaken for equivalence. Keep ESRS and GRI fields, claims and quality checks separate.

Rule

Myth vs reality

Myth: A complete disclosure checklist proves ESRS compliance. Reality: compliance depends on correct scope, materiality, evidence, disclosure quality, permitted reliefs, controls and fair presentation. The matrix is a control tool, not an assurance conclusion.

Readiness

9. Matrix and content-index checklist

  • The source set and ESRS version are locked and visible in the matrix metadata.
  • Each row has an official DR, paragraph or AR source anchor.
  • Conditions, exceptions and information-materiality decisions are preserved.
  • Each reportable row links to an approved IRO and topic or sub-topic.
  • Boundary, period and time horizon are consistent with the related narrative, metric and target.
  • Prepare, review and approval roles are assigned at datapoint level where needed.
  • Evidence references are precise and accessible to reviewers and assurance providers.
  • Estimate, proxy, methodology and limitation fields are complete.
  • Control and assurance status are updated before disclosure freeze.
  • Final locations are checked after pagination and all cross-references work.
  • Incorporated-by-reference information is separately identified and tested.
  • The ESRS public index and any GRI Content Index are generated and reviewed as separate outputs.

Related Knowledge Hub articles

ESRS 2 General Disclosures

ESRS Policies, Actions, Metrics and Targets

How to Identify Impacts, Risks and Opportunities Under ESRS

In practice

Related standards and mappings

Relationship Standard / disclosure
Direct or supporting ESRS 1 paras 17-18 and 23-31
Direct or supporting ESRS 2 IRO-2
Direct or supporting ESRS 2 GDR-P/A/M/T
Direct or supporting GRI 1 Foundation 2021 Requirement 7

Take it with you

The checklists as a working spreadsheet

Every checklist and table on this page, with empty status, owner and evidence columns for your team to fill in and keep.

Download .xlsx

✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop

Ask about this guide

It answers from this page, and reaches into the linked disclosure cards when your question is about the standard itself. Your first two answers are free without signing in.

Try
2 free answers Automated · the LRA team is one click away

Go deeper · ESRS

ESRS and CSRD training

Double materiality, datapoints and the sustainability statement, with a mentor on your own report.

Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.

See course formats
/en/knowledge-hub/disclosure-guides/esrs/esrs-reporting-cycle-and-controls/esrs-disclosure-matrix-and-content-index-requirements-ars-datapoints-o/