The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) marks a shift in sustainability reporting. Following the first round of CSRD reporting for the 2024 fiscal year, many companies have now published their second CSRD report. At the same time, the regulatory framework remains in a state of constant flux. The European Commission’s Omnibus Package will bring simplifications and clarifications to the CSRD, EU Taxonomy, CBAM, and CSDDD, including the adoption of the revised ESRS standards, expected by mid-2026. Against this backdrop, it is essential for companies to assess their own level of implementation and to integrate regulatory changes in a targeted manner into the further development of their reporting. 

The Horváth CSRD Study 2026 is aimed both at companies that are already required to report and wish to further refine their reporting - whether in comparison to their initial report or relative to their industry peers - and at organizations preparing for their first CSRD reporting for the 2027 fiscal year.  

The study analyzes the current status of CSRD reporting implementation, highlights changes from the previous year, and demonstrates how companies are currently addressing key requirements - particularly in the area of climate disclosures. 

The study is based on an analysis of 65 recent CSRD reports from Europe. The companies examined range in size from fewer than 250 to over 600,000 employees and come from six different industries. As a result, the study provides in-depth insights across a broad spectrum of companies and enables robust industry benchmarking. Key findings from the study include: 

• Climate change (E1), own workforce (S1), and business conduct (G1) remain material topics across most companies. 

• On average, companies report 43 Impacts, Risks & Opportunities (IROs), with 82% showing changes from the previous year. 

• 95% of companies disclose a climate transition plan; only 55% have been approved by the board, and 65% have been externally validated. 

A key finding of the study shows that climate-related reporting has generally matured, particularly with regard to climate transition plans and climate risk analysis. At the same time, differences persist in terms of depth, integration into corporate governance, and the external validation of targets, such as through SBTi. 

The study thus provides a fact-based assessment of the current market landscape and helps companies contextualize their own CSRD reporting in light of regulatory developments and market practices. 

The full results are available in the study report. Upon request, we can also provide an industry-specific analysis - please feel free to contact us.