Why we're building Zenancy

We started looking at this properly after watching a mid-sized property group get a quote for a physical climate risk assessment. Six figures, four months, and a deliverable they would not be able to reproduce or interrogate. They needed it because AASB S2 said so, and they had no realistic alternative.

Meanwhile, nearly every dataset that assessment would rely on is public. G-NAF is open. Cadastral parcels are open in most jurisdictions. Geoscience Australia publishes bushfire boundaries. SILO gives you decades of gridded climate observations. Digital Earth Australia measures shoreline change from satellite imagery going back to 1988. NSW publishes flood studies. None of it is secret; it is just scattered across thirty portals in fifteen formats, and assembling it is genuinely tedious work.

That gap between "the data is free" and "the answer costs six figures" is mostly assembly labour. Which is the kind of work an agent with a sandbox and a data lake is actually good at.

What we are building

An agent that sits over a curated lake of Australian open land, hazard and climate data, and answers portfolio-level questions about physical climate risk. The output has to be something you can hand to an auditor: a table, and a methodology appendix naming every dataset, vintage and assumption behind it.

We are deliberately not building a score. Scores are easy to sell and impossible to defend. If a number in your annual report cannot be traced back to a public dataset and a documented method, it will eventually cost you more than it saved.

Where we are

Private preview, working with Group 2 reporters and a handful of accounting firms advising them. If that is you, tell us about your portfolio.