NGFS Scenario Analysis Guide: What Changed in 2025
By Jonas Mohamed Osman Abdelghafour
The main governance lessons from the updated NGFS guide to climate scenario analysis for supervisors, banks and insurers.
Executive answer
The updated NGFS guide reinforces that scenario analysis begins with a clear objective, not with a dataset. A scenario designed for strategic exploration may be unsuitable for capital quantification, while a supervisory exercise may prioritise comparability over institution-specific realism.
What changed
Materiality, horizon and transmission channels should be chosen together. Physical and transition risks interact with macroeconomic conditions, management actions and portfolio composition. A well-designed exercise explains these boundaries before presenting numbers.
Implications for financial institutions
Supervisors and boards need evidence that scenarios influenced a decision or clarified uncertainty. Useful documentation covers selection, plausibility, data lineage, limitations, sensitivity, independent challenge and the treatment of second-round effects.
Relevance to Quantica Climate Risk Model
Quantica Climate Risk Model is positioned around this governed use of scenarios. Its public narrative focuses on traceability and decision relevance, while all internal methodology remains protected.
Conclusion
For ngfs scenario analysis guide: what changed in 2025, the practical priority is disciplined interpretation: connect authoritative evidence to a defined decision, preserve the limitations, and ensure accountable review. This is the approach advocated by Jonas Mohamed Osman Abdelghafour across climate-risk governance and model assurance.
Primary sources
More in Scenario Analysis
- What NGFS Phase V Scenarios Change for Risk Teams
By Jonas Mohamed Osman Abdelghafour · 8 min read
- NGFS Short-Term Climate Scenarios and Near-Term Risk
By Jonas Mohamed Osman Abdelghafour · 8 min read
- Sovereign Debt and Climate Risk: 2025 Evidence
By Jonas Mohamed Osman Abdelghafour · 8 min read