Barclays scores 3 points higher than HSBC Holdings plc on SINK.
Barclays is more sustainable according to SINK's scores, scoring 35/100 vs HSBC Holdings plc's 32/100, a difference of 3 points.
Barclays scores 35/100 on SINK (Below expectations). Barclays operates with operational emissions under control but finances fossil fuels at scale—$34–35bn annually—undercutting climate commitments. Financed emissions lack a single reported total, intensity targets dominate, and only 41% of in-scope lending is covered by 1.5C-aligned targets. Greenwashing in sustainable-finance labelling persists.
HSBC Holdings plc scores 32/100 on SINK (Below expectations). HSBC's operational emissions have genuinely declined 76% since 2019, but financed emissions — the bank's true environmental footprint — have worsened. Targets were systematically weakened in February 2025: net-zero operations pushed to 2050, oil & gas reduction halved to 14–30%, power utilities switched to intensity metrics. The bank exited SBTi validation and the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, and faces an upheld ASA ruling for greenwashing. Leadership position on climate regulation is actively obstructive.
Both companies are rated on the same 10-question SINK rubric: Scope 1/2/3 carbon footprint, energy source, nature and biodiversity, resource use, water, emissions trajectory, science-based targets, transparency, and controversies. Scores are 0–100, based on public data, and fully reproducible.
See the full leaderboard: 1,023 companies ranked.
View the full leaderboard →