“Over the years we’ve invested significantly in our field data team - focusing on producing trusted ratings. While this ensures the accuracy of our Ratings, it doesn’t allow the scale across the thousands of projects that buyers are considering.”
For more information on carbon credit procurement trends, read our "Key Takeaways for 2025" article. We share five, data-backed tips to improve your procurement strategy.
One more thing: Connect to Supply customers also get access to the rest of Sylvera's tools. That means you can easily see project ratings and evaluate an individual project's strengths, procure quality carbon credits, and even monitor project activity (particularly if you’ve invested at the pre-issuance stage.)
Book a free demo of Sylvera to see our platform's procurement and reporting features in action.
Buyers are asking broader questions when they assess a carbon credit project. Is it high integrity? Does it have a compelling co-benefits story? Is it using a methodology aligned with the Core Carbon Principles (CCP)? Does the developer have a strong track record?
And increasingly, a more practical one: does the Rating cover the vintage I’m buying, and does it fit my retirement schedule?
That last question is easy to overlook, because a Rating can read like a property of the project as a whole. In practice, a Rating covers the vintages that were assessed.
Check Ratings in the Sylvera Project Catalog here.
What a Rating covers
A Sylvera Rating reflects the evidence available when it was formed, for the vintages it assessed. If a project was Rated in 2024, the Rating might cover vintages 2018–2024. Credits from 2025 and 2026 aren’t covered until the Rating is updated.
That doesn’t mean later vintages are weaker. It means they haven’t been assessed yet.
Why one vintage can differ from the next
Projects change between vintages, and so does the market around them. Three examples:
Methodology. Cookstove projects are moving from the legacy methodology VMR0006, which the ICVCM has not approved as meeting the CCPs, to VM0050, which it has. From the 2027 vintage, all cookstove projects in the VCS Program must use VM0050. The methodology behind a project’s newest credits can differ from the one its Rating was formed on.
Baselines. Over-crediting concerns have made dynamic baselines the standard for REDD+, with leading registries now requiring them by default. A project’s newest vintages may rest on a different baseline approach than its older ones.
Technology. Biochar production technology has advanced quickly in recent years. Our newest framework covers the full spectrum of biochar production, from rudimentary open-kiln methods to managed batch and continuous industrial systems, with a dedicated pathway for each. A Rating formed under an earlier framework version didn’t make those distinctions, so it’s worth checking which version a biochar Rating was formed on.
New evidence. On one project, a first Rating found no evidence of land or concession rights. The developer submitted evidence of both, and the Rating moved from BBB to A. New information can change the picture in either direction.
We update our frameworks annually to follow scientific best practice, so a Rating formed under an earlier framework version may not reflect the latest thinking.
Questions to ask before you commit
Three questions are worth asking of any Rating you’re relying on, particularly for multi-year programs:
- Which vintages does the Rating cover?
- When was it last reviewed?
- Is there a newer framework version?
Every Sylvera project page shows these as three signals. The Rating date is flagged when it hasn’t been reviewed within a year, the framework version notes when a newer one exists, and vintage coverage flags credits outside the assessed vintages.
It’s a quick check you can make before a purchase, and a useful one to build into your procurement process.
The whole project still needs checking
None of this means a Rating should move with every new data point. Buyers assess the whole project across every vintage, and a Rating that shifted constantly couldn’t support a multi-year contract.
Real design changes, like adding fire mitigation, are reflected in the affected parts of the Rating once there’s evidence. Cumulative risks, such as a change in fNRB values, are assessed vintage by vintage, and the Rating shows their combined effect across the project.
Recency adds context to the Rating. It doesn’t replace the project’s history.
What should buyers do?
A Rating still tells you what a project is. Recency tells you which vintages that picture covers and how current it is. For buyers, the next time a Rating informs a decision, check the vintage coverage and Rating date alongside the grade, particularly for a program you’re planning to live with for a few years.
Explore Sylvera Ratings, or talk to our team about vintage coverage for the projects you’re evaluating.
