Compute Desk for asset managers
Track transition risk with probability, not promises.
Companies publish commitments. Grids publish physics. Put the two side by side — with sources — before your analyst signs a conclusion.
Holdings review path
Commitments vs evidence
- Intelligence Feed
- Power Diligence
- Specialist Agents
The same holdings review, with and without a number
Traditional disclosure review
“Company claims 100% renewable energy.”
“Carbon intensity appears to be declining.”
“Regulatory risk seems manageable.”
Self-reported claims. Backward-looking. No probability of holding up.
Illustrative Compute Desk view
89% sample score for a 24/7 CFE scenario
62% sample score for a carbon-target scenario
94% sample score for a regulatory scenario
Illustrative scores — the point is that every score keeps its source coverage and assumptions open for your review.
See where the energy risk actually sits
- →Map energy-risk exposure holding by holding, not at the sector average
- →Spot geographic clustering your factor model treats as diversification
- →Benchmark peers on documented scenario scores, not marketing decks
- →Stress the book scenario by scenario, with each assumption stated
Test commitments against explicit scenarios
Stated commitments vs. probability of delivery
Hyperscaler A
DC REIT B
Sample probabilities for illustration. Client views depend on connected operational data, grid mix, and regulatory sources.
Research workflows for scenario analysis
Thematic investing
Put your thesis against source-linked energy and regulatory scenarios. Each score is a research input — not a prediction of investment performance, and we won't pretend otherwise.
Risk arbitrage
Compare regulatory-exposure scenarios with what the market is assuming, before a human makes the portfolio decision. The workflow does not execute trades.
Event-driven
Review tariff changes, interconnection approvals, and M&A events with their source trail and the scenario assumptions spelled out.
Testing a portfolio company's regulatory exposure
A design-partner review could put a hypothetical utilization-rule scenario against public filings and facility exposure, with the assumptions behind the sample score in the open. Your analysts then argue hold, engage, hedge, or reallocate — with something concrete to argue about.
This is not a customer case study or evidence of avoided loss, alpha, ESG improvement, or research-time reduction.
Bring three holdings.
In a design-partner walkthrough we map selected holdings to configured scenarios — portfolio exposure, regulatory risk, and energy-transition commitments — and show you the review in full.