Epic Games sustainability score: 24/100
Better than 1% of SaaS / Digital Services
Below expectations starts at 31. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Epic Games is a US-based video game and digital services company founded in 1991, headquartered in Cary, North Carolina. Best known for Fortnite, a free-to-play battle royale with 650M+ registered accounts, Epic develops game engines, tools, and operates global cloud-based platforms.
More about Epic Games
It employs approximately 4,000 people across 40+ offices worldwide.
Founded 1991Head office Cary, North Carolina, USStaff ~4,000–5,000 (post-2023 layoffs, per Statista 2024 estimate of 4,358)Revenue ~$5.7B (2024 estimate, Sacra)Website ↗
Epic Games has disclosed zero operational emissions data, no supply chain assessment, and no climate targets despite operating global infrastructure at scale. The company shows minimal environmental governance, no sustainability reporting, and a pattern of regulatory breaches involving consumer protection violations.
Epic Games scores 24/100 (Significant gaps) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it. Last verified May 2026.
That places Epic Games joint 903rd of 1,023 companies scored, and joint 66th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services.
What is Epic Games doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Nature & Biodiversity Impact (4/10, 3/10). Weakest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain (1/10, 1/10).
Where Epic Games lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
What would raise this score
- Emissions from its own operationsPublish emissions figures for its own operations, even an estimate from energy bills.
- Emissions from its supply chainAssess where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling, even from energy bills or mileage.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations1/10No emissions figures for its own operations, not even an estimate from energy bills.
- Emissions from its supply chain1/10No assessment of where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are falling1/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- How clean its energy is2/10No renewable energy tariff or major efficiency investment shown.
- Its effect on nature3/10No assessment of its effect on nature, and no basic environmental policy.
- How it uses materials and handles waste2/10No active waste reduction, reuse or repair shown.
- Its effect on water2/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets1/10No emissions reduction targets.
- How openly it reports1/10No sustainability information published.
- Its record on controversies4/10Points deducted for controversies or its business model. The finding is under question 10.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
How is Epic Games's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Epic Games's score changed?
Epic Games's score has moved from 33 to 24 across 3 recorded reviews, down 9 points.
- 33 → 24-97 November 2026
Sources replaced with the company's own or independent reports or removed. Question 7 lowered: no water data or awareness is evidenced. With no published emissions figure, the 0.70x size step now applies.
- 33 → 337 November 2026
Correction, 7 November 2026: removed an unsourced emissions figure. Score unchanged.
- Scored 3311 April 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Epic Games's score based on?
8 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
25% of them were published by Epic Games itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Scored on 11 April 2026 under an earlier version of our method. We're re-checking it under the current method.
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Is this your company? Claim this profile (free)
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current band, sector rank and score, and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Want your own page like this?
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
How does Epic Games compare with other saas / digital services companies?
Where Epic Games sits among saas / digital services peers.
Among the 69 major saas / digital services brands we've scored, Epic Games is tied =66th of 69, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in SaaS / Digital Services?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Epic Games.
Scholarly iQ publishes no environmental data whatsoever.
See the breakdown →ed2go publishes no sustainability information of its own.
See the breakdown →OpenAI operates massive compute infrastructure with zero disclosed emissions data across Scope 1, 2, or 3.
See the breakdown →Which companies moved this week, and why.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it.