SFDR 2.0: A Reset for Sustainable Fund Classification
01/20/2026
•
5 mins read
The Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) is the EU’s framework for governing how sustainability considerations are disclosed in investment products. While designed to improve transparency and reduce greenwashing, SFDR gradually evolved into a de facto labelling system, with Articles 8 and 9 shaping how funds were marketed and perceived.
In late 2025, the European Commission put together an SFDR 2.0 proposal. It’s intended to acknowledge that this approach has created complexity, inconsistency, and confusion for investors. By shifting toward clearer product categories and simpler disclosures, the reform aims to restore credibility and usability.
A New Category-Based Framework
SFDR 2.0 introduces three product categories: Sustainable, Transition, and ESG Basics. While categorization is voluntary, funds choosing a category must meet mandatory criteria for that classification. Each category is tied to a minimum 70% portfolio alignment with the stated strategy, alongside mandatory exclusions for activities such as those involving controversial weapons, tobacco, hard coal, and severe breaches of international norms. Products outside these categories face tighter limits on ESG-related naming and marketing claims.
Sustainable products are reserved for funds investing primarily in sustainable activities or assets, including taxonomy-aligned strategies and Paris-aligned benchmarks. These products are subject to the strictest fossil fuel exclusions, including a ban on new coal, oil, and gas development.
Transition products are designed to capture strategies financing the shift toward sustainability. They rely on credible transition plans, science-based targets, and structured engagement, with tighter restrictions on fossil fuels than ESG Basics products and a clear focus on forward-looking change.
ESG Basics products integrate ESG approaches in the investment strategy but do not qualify as Sustainable or Transition. While still subject to baseline exclusions and the 70% alignment rule, this category has drawn early criticism for its relatively lenient treatment of fossil fuels.
Less Complexity, Tighter Guardrails
SFDR 2.0 removes entity-level PAI disclosures and simplifies product templates. Rather than relying on the current sustainable investment definition and DNSH mechanics in SFDR 1.0, the proposal operationalizes ‘no harm’ and safeguards through a common exclusion baseline plus product-level disclosure of principal adverse impacts, with DNSH and good governance reflected via category criteria. Disclosures are significantly shortened, with pre-contractual and periodic reports capped at two pages, and marketing rules tightened to limit sustainability claims to qualifying products.
The intent is clear. SFDR 2.0 shifts from dense, technical disclosures toward clearer categories supported by exclusions and simpler safeguards.
Timeline and Market Impact
The legislative process is expected to conclude in late 2026 or early 2027, followed by an 18-month implementation period. Until then, asset managers must continue complying with SFDR 1.0 while preparing for a full reclassification of their product ranges.
For the market, this likely means a smaller but more clearly defined universe of labelled funds. Many current Article 8 and 9 products are expected to reclassify, while Sustainable products under the new regime may be fewer but broader in scope. Asset managers face near-term transition costs and communication challenges, but also the prospect of greater long-term clarity and reduced compliance complexity.
A Reform Still Under Scrutiny
Initial reactions have been mixed. Industry groups broadly welcome the simplification and stronger fossil fuel exclusions for Sustainable and Transition products. At the same time, concerns persist regarding the scope of the ESG Basics category, the lack of a level playing field for unclassified funds, and the absence of more stringent engagement requirements for transition strategies. Organizations such as Eurosif and Morningstar have described the proposal as a step forward that still leaves room for improvement, particularly in preventing greenwashing at the lower end of the spectrum. Triodos Investment Management has also voiced similar caution.
What SFDR 2.0 Signals
SFDR 2.0 reflects a broader recalibration in EU sustainable finance policy. After years of expanding disclosure requirements, the focus is shifting toward usability, clarity, and enforceable standards. For asset managers, the message is straightforward: Sustainability claims will be more tightly defined, product positioning will matter more, and the margin for ambiguity is narrowing as SFDR enters its next phase.
The European Union stands at the forefront of global efforts to promote environmental, social, and governance (ESG) accountability. As the world becomes increasingly ESG-aware, the EU has developed a comprehensive regulatory framework designed to ensure transparency and accountability across all sectors.
These regulations represent the EU's commitment to sustainable development and responsible business practices. However, the regulatory landscape is evolving, with the February 2025 EU Omnibus Proposal introducing potential modifications aimed at reducing the regulatory burden on businesses. However, these proposals come at the risk of substantially undercutting the impact of the regulations.
This article recaps the current ESG regulatory framework in the EU, explores the changes proposed by the Omnibus, analyzes the potential impacts of these modifications, and discusses how financial institutions can navigate this evolving landscape while maintaining compliance.
The ESG Regulatory Landscape in the EU
The EU is advancing sustainability through a framework of regulations that enhance corporate accountability and reporting on ESG impacts. These measures aim to promote genuine sustainable practices and address international trade and emissions challenges. Though comprehensive, these regulations are also, at times, confusing in the way they overlap and impact each other. To get started, let’s examine the EU Taxonomy, SFDR, and CSRD—a triad of interconnected regulations designed to streamline and strengthen sustainable investing practices.
EU Taxonomy
The EU Taxonomy provides a classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities, offering clear criteria to determine whether an economic activity can be considered "green."
Key Aspects of the EU Taxonomy
Defines criteria for environmentally sustainable economic activities
Requires companies subject to CSRD to report on Taxonomy alignment
The Taxonomy helps channel investment toward genuinely sustainable projects and businesses by creating a common language for sustainable activities.
Status
The EU Taxonomy has been operational since January 2022 with phased implementation. As of March 2025, companies subject to CSRD must disclose their taxonomy alignment percentages.
Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR)
The SFDR focuses specifically on the financial sector, requiring financial market participants to disclose how they integrate ESG risks into their investment decisions and the sustainability impact of their financial products.
Key Aspects of SFDR
Requires disclosure of ESG risks in investment processes
Classifies financial products based on their sustainability characteristics
Aligns with EU Taxonomy criteria for sustainable investments
Aims to prevent greenwashing in financial products
The SFDR plays a crucial role in bringing transparency to the rapidly growing sustainable investment market.
Status
Fully implemented since March 2021, with enhanced Level 2 requirements since January 2023. All EU financial market participants must classify products under Articles 6, 8, or 9. Current market data shows that 28% of EU funds are compliant with Article 8 and 5% with Article 9, with a significant trend of reclassification from Article 9 to 8 due to stricter interpretations.
The CSRD stands as a cornerstone of the EU's ESG regulatory framework, requiring companies to report comprehensively on their environmental, social, and governance impacts. This directive mandates alignment with the EU Taxonomy, ensuring standardized reporting of sustainability metrics.
Key Aspects of CSRD
Requires detailed reporting on ESG impacts
Aligns with EU Taxonomy criteria for sustainability
Currently applies to companies with 250+ employees
Enhances corporate transparency on sustainability issues
The CSRD represents a significant step forward in standardizing sustainability reporting across the EU, providing investors, consumers, and regulators with comparable information on corporate sustainability performance.
Status
The CSRD, adopted in November 2022, replaces the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD). The transition to CSRD reporting was originally slated to begin in 2025 and would expand the number of companies subject to reporting requirements to 49,000 (vs 11,700 under NFRD). However, as we’ll see later, the Omnibus may push back the timing of CSRD.
Outside of the EU Taxonomy, SFDR, and CSRD, the Omnibus Proposal highlights two other key ESG regulations: CSDDD and CBAM. These regulations relate to corporate accountability for supply chains and to limiting carbon leakage.
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)
The CSDDD focuses on corporate accountability throughout global supply chains, requiring companies to identify, prevent, and mitigate human rights and environmental risks associated with their operations.
Key Aspects of CSDDD
Requires companies to identify and mitigate human rights and environmental risks
Applies to full supply chains, ensuring comprehensive oversight
Applies to EU companies with 1,000+ employees and €450 million+ global turnover and non-EU companies with over €450 million EU turnover
Mandates regular monitoring and reporting on due diligence efforts
Strengthens corporate accountability for sustainability across operations
This directive acknowledges that a company's sustainability impact extends beyond its direct operations, encompassing its entire value chain.
Status
CSDDD was adopted in April 2024. Its phased implementation is slated to start in June 2026 and be completed by June 2028. The timing and scope of CSDDD is subject to change following the Omnibus Proposal.
Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
The CBAM is an innovative approach to preventing carbon leakage. It levies a carbon tax on imports to ensure that the EU's ambitious climate policies do not simply shift carbon-intensive production outside its borders.
Key Aspects of CBAM
Imposes a carbon tax on imported goods
Requires importers to report emissions data
Ensures payment for embedded carbon costs in imported products
Aims to prevent carbon leakage to regions with weaker climate policies
This mechanism aims to create a level playing field for EU producers subject to carbon pricing while encouraging global partners to implement similar carbon pricing mechanisms.
Status
The transitional phase for CBAM began in October 2023, with full implementation scheduled for January 2026. It currently covers cement, iron and steel, aluminum, fertilizers, electricity, and hydrogen. The certificate requirements will phase in gradually from 30% in 2026 to 100% by 2034. It’s expected to apply to 1.8 million EU importers and generate €5-14 billion in annual revenue when fully implemented.
The February 2025 EU Omnibus Proposal
Purpose and Goals
The EU Omnibus Proposal represents a significant recalibration of the EU's regulatory approach, seeking to balance sustainability ambitions with business competitiveness concerns.
The primary objectives of the Omnibus focus on alleviating regulatory burdens faced by businesses, simplifying compliance requirements, and streamlining reporting obligations. These efforts aim to enhance business competitiveness while addressing regulatory complexity concerns. By minimizing these challenges, the goal is to create a more favorable environment for businesses to thrive. However, this push for simplification could come at the expense of transparency and accountability, especially in sectors where regulation plays a protective role.
Impact Analysis: How the Omnibus Changes ESG Compliance
Below, we’ll take a closer look at each regulation and the changes proposed by the Omnibus Proposal.
EU Taxonomy Modifications and Implications
The Omnibus Proposal suggests a Level 2 modification to the application of the EU Taxonomy, reducing the number of companies required to report taxonomy alignment.
Key Changes:
Taxonomy alignment reporting is limited to companies subject to CSDDD
Voluntary reporting option for companies not required to comply
Possible Implications:
Reduced availability of standardized sustainability data
Increased difficulty in verifying "green" business claims
Higher risk of greenwashing in financial markets
Less reliable information for sustainable investors
These modifications would potentially undermine the Taxonomy's role in creating a common language for sustainable activities.
CSRD Modifications and Implications
The Omnibus Proposal significantly narrows the scope of the CSRD, reducing the number of companies required to report on ESG impacts.
Key Changes:
Threshold increase from 250+ to 1,000+ employees
Optional reporting for SMEs
A two-year delay in reporting obligations for some companies
Possible Implications:
80% reduction in companies required to report
Decreased transparency in corporate sustainability performance
Fewer sustainability data available to investors and regulators
Potential challenges in tracking sustainability progress
These modifications would substantially reduce the regulatory burden on smaller companies but raise concerns about the availability of comprehensive sustainability data.
CSDDD Modifications and Implications
The Omnibus includes significant modifications to CSDDD, with a narrowed scope and reduced monitoring requirements.
Key Changes:
Due diligence is limited to direct suppliers with over 500 employees, not full supply chains
Monitoring frequency reduced from annual to every 5 years
Delayed enforcement for one year for the first batch (Companies with 1.5 billion in turnover and 5000 employees)
Possible Implications:
Weakened corporate accountability for supply chain sustainability
Increased risk of undetected human rights and environmental violations
Reduced monitoring of global supply chain impacts
Extended timeline before full implementation
These changes would significantly reduce companies' compliance burdens but come at the risk of removing the essence of the directive, which is eliminating child labor, forced labor, etc.
SFDR Modifications and Implications
While not directly modified, changes to other regulations, particularly the EU Taxonomy, indirectly affect the SFDR.
Indirect Impacts:
Reduced availability of reliable ESG data
Challenges in differentiating truly sustainable investments
Potential increase in greenwashing risk
These indirect effects could undermine the SFDR's effectiveness in bringing transparency to sustainable investment products.
CBAM Modifications and Implications
The Omnibus Proposal simplifies CBAM compliance, particularly for smaller importers.
Key Changes:
Small importers (under 50 metric tons/year) are exempted
Reduced reporting burden for over 182,000 businesses
Possible Implications:
Simplified compliance for small businesses
Potential loophole risk if companies split shipments to stay under the threshold
Maintained coverage of 99% of emissions despite exemptions
These modifications would maintain the CBAM's effectiveness while reducing the administrative burden on smaller importers.
The Debate: Perspectives on the Omnibus Proposal
Arguments in Favor
Proponents of the Omnibus Proposal emphasize its benefits for business competitiveness and regulatory efficiency. They highlight the reduced administrative burden, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which often struggle with complex regulations. Additionally, the changes aim to simplify compliance requirements, making it easier for businesses to adhere to regulations. By aligning with global standards, the proposal helps maintain the EU's economic competitiveness while promoting a more efficient allocation of resources across industries. Together, these factors create a more streamlined and supportive environment for businesses to thrive.
As BusinessEurope Director General Markus J. Beyrer stated: "Doing better with fewer and clearer norms is what European companies of all sizes are asking for. By reducing unnecessary reporting and regulatory burdens, the first Omnibus will allow companies to contribute more effectively to the EU's sustainability objectives while also preserving the EU economy's competitiveness."
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also expressed support for the proposal, stating: "EU companies will benefit from streamlined rules. This will make life easier for our businesses while ensuring we stay firmly on course toward our decarbonization goals."
Criticisms and Concerns
Critics raise significant concerns about the potential undermining of the EU's sustainability ambitions. They argue that the Omnibus Proposal may lead to unintended consequences, including reduced transparency in corporate sustainability performance, weakened supply chain accountability, and regulatory uncertainty during transition periods. Additionally, it could undermine sustainability objectives and increase the risk of greenwashing. As Mariana Ferreira from WWF European Policy Office commented:
"The Commission's sudden urge to destroy laws that are crucial for the achievement of the EU Green Deal is a perilous approach that is forcing Europe into a time of regulatory uncertainty. Under the guise of 'simplification,' the Commission put forward a proposal that will hinder economic and business success."
"The Omnibus proposal erodes EU's corporate accountability commitments and slashes human rights and environmental protections."
While the European Parliament debates the Omnibus Proposal, the fact remains that even if the regulations are delayed or loosened, the need for risk management remains unchanged. Investors require transparency, and companies must manage supplier risk effectively.
Navigating ESG Risks with SESAMm
SESAMm’s cutting-edge AI solutions empower investors, financial institutions, and corporations to navigate the complexities of ESG compliance with confidence. Leveraging an industry-leading data lake and state-of-the-art AI, SESAMm uncovers hidden risks in supply chains and target companies, providing real-time insights that drive proactive decision-making. By transforming regulatory challenges into opportunities for responsible and sustainable growth, SESAMm helps businesses stay ahead of evolving ESG requirements while mitigating risk and enhancing transparency.
SESAMm’s AI Technology Reveals ESG Insights
Discover unparalleled insights into ESG controversies, risks, and opportunities across industries. Learn more about how SESAMm can help you analyze millions of private and public companies using AI-powered text analysis tools.
The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or CS3D) is a significant European Union initiative, shifting businesses from voluntary environmental and social practices to legally binding obligations. Companies must align with stringent standards to address issues like child labor, modern slavery, and environmental degradation. The directive's phased implementation starts in 2026 and focuses on companies with extensive operations and revenues.
CSDDD requires companies to proactively identify, prevent, and mitigate adverse impacts across their value chains. It mandates transparency and public reporting, enhancing trust with consumers and investors. The directive also imposes financial penalties for non-compliance, highlighting the importance of sustainable practices for business stability.
Fill out this form to download our ebook and explore the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) to ensure your business is compliant with the latest EU regulations.
Following the success of SESAMm’s AI-Powered Deal Screening Reports, we’re expanding our due diligence suite with a new addition: the AI-Powered Legal Risk Report. Built for private equity, M&A, and legal teams, it delivers a rapid, data-driven view of a company’s litigation, regulatory, reputational exposure and all public compliance documentation and disclosures, helping professionals identify red flags early and make faster, more informed decisions.
Accelerating Legal Due Diligence
In private equity transactions, time is limited but the stakes are high. Traditional legal research can take weeks of reviewing court filings, disclosures, and media coverage. SESAMm’s Legal Risk Report automates this process, scanning millions of documents to surface potential risks in less than an hour.
Each report is generated automatically in less than 15 minutes and backed by verifiable sources, giving legal and compliance teams the transparency they need to validate findings and support defensible due diligence.
The Legal Risk Report helps professionals accelerate and strengthen their assessments at every stage of a transaction:
Reduce blind spots: Uncover litigation, compliance, or reputational issues that manual research might miss.
Strengthen documentation: Support client memos and audit findings with verifiable, AI-extracted evidence.
Reduce costs and time: Cut research hours while maintaining defensible, high-quality standards.
SESAMm’s technology is trusted by leading financial institutions to enhance their understanding of ESG, reputational, and regulatory risks. The new Legal Risk Report builds on this foundation, extending SESAMm’s AI capabilities to help law firms, compliance officers, and corporate legal teams uncover litigation and reputational exposures with speed and transparency.
By combining AI-powered text analysis with structured risk categorization, SESAMm enables professionals to go from question to insight - and from risk to response - faster than ever.
Stay ahead with the latest in ESG and AI intelligence
Join our mailing list to receive new reports, event invites, and updates from SESAMm directly to your inbox.