Re-state any portfolio in any taxonomy.
Your labelled-bond holdings each speak the taxonomy of their home market. When an LP or your SFDR reporting needs the book in EU Taxonomy terms — or a mandate asks for the ASEAN or China view — ACT-IDs let every position's activities be read in that taxonomy, and aggregated.
What this is — and isn't. ACT-ID shows how each activity is classified in each taxonomy that recognises it. It does not test technical screening criteria, DNSH, or minimum safeguards, and it does not determine alignment. Alignment judgment remains yours or your SPO's — ACT-ID anchors and accelerates it.
Why investors use Act IDs
Across a portfolio of green, social, and sustainability bonds, the same underlying activity is described differently by every issuer, in whatever taxonomy their home market uses. Your team ends up doing repetitive re-mapping work every time a stakeholder needs the book re-stated in a different taxonomy's terms.
When issuers, banks, and SPO providers reference Act IDs in their documentation, that re-mapping work shrinks to a lookup. Each position's ACT-IDs already carry their classification in every taxonomy that recognises them.
Portfolio tagging
Tag your holdings by Act ID to build a portfolio view organised by financed activity — regardless of how each issuer describes it in their own framework. Compare allocations to offshore wind across five issuers without manual interpretation.
Re-stating across taxonomies
When an LP, regulator, or mandate asks for the portfolio in a different taxonomy's terms, every position's ACT-IDs resolve directly to that taxonomy's view — no re-reading frameworks, no re-interpreting SPO opinions, no lowest-common-denominator reporting.
Internal reporting
Use Act IDs as the activity dimension in your internal ESG and allocation reporting. Standard identifiers make it easier to build consistent reports across your team, systems, and mandates.
Data vendor alignment
As data vendors integrate Act IDs, the activity classification in your data feeds will align with your own internal tagging — reducing reconciliation and improving data quality.
Roll-up composes by default
When the issuer's framework, the arranging bank's loan book, and the
SPO's opinion all reference the same ACT-Us, your portfolio roll-up
stops being a bespoke mapping exercise. The question "how much of my
labelled-bond exposure is ultimately financing wind generation?" becomes
a GROUP BY act_id across every holding — not a project
with per-issuer interpretation.
And because the atomic unit is the use-of-proceeds (not the sector classification), roll-ups stay at the granularity investors actually care about — "onshore wind construction" stays distinct from "grid expansion for wind integration", even though both sit inside the same NACE sector. Hierarchy decisions (grouping for summary reporting) are made at query time, not baked into the identifiers.
| Act ID | Activity | Holdings | Allocation |
|---|---|---|---|
ACT-U-W4G2UF | Offshore wind | 4 bonds | €240m |
ACT-U-NHYSFK | Solar PV | 6 bonds | €310m |
ACT-U-7H1KZ1 | Electric rail | 2 bonds | €90m |
Activity comparison across 4 issuers using different descriptions — unified by a single Act ID.
{
"isin": "XS1234567890",
"issuer": "Example Corp",
"act_id": "ACT-U-W4G2UF",
"activity": "Electricity generation from wind power",
"allocation_eur": 120000000
} Key benefits for investors
- Cleaner portfolio views organised by activity
- Less manual mapping across issuer frameworks
- Easier comparison across transactions
- Better alignment with ESG data vendor outputs
Take the data with you
Download the full registry and mappings, or browse the crosswalks between the taxonomies your stakeholders report under.