Understanding Spend-Based Emission Factor Databases: CEDA and EXIOBASE

Spend-based Scope 3 emissions calculations rely on an emission factor (EF) database to translate your spend data into estimated emissions. Cozero offers two such databases: CEDA and EXIOBASE. Both are recognized multi-regional input-output databases, but they differ in coverage, update frequency, and methodology, which is why the choice matters and why moving between them changes your reported numbers.

We now have a dual-database approach. This article explains what each database offers, how to think about which one fits your situation, and what to expect if you're considering a change.

Who is this for?

Teams using or considering spend-based Scope 3 accounting on Cozero
Users whose auditors have asked about data currency or methodology
Anyone deciding whether to move from one database to the other
Teams with science-based targets (SBTs) built on a spend-based baseline

Why we're introducing CEDA

A few things are driving this:

Data currency. Spend-based emission factors are sensitive to inflation. Older financial-year data becomes less accurate every year it's used for current calculations.
Audit and reporting expectations. Scope 3 is now the primary focus for most companies' climate reporting, and auditors increasingly expect more recently updated emissions factor data.
Broader coverage. CEDA covers a wider variety of countries and industry sectors, which helps produce more precise results for global or detailed supply chains.

The two databases at a glance

Dimension	CEDA	EXIOBASE
Countries covered	148 + 1 "Rest of World" region	44 + 5 "Rest of World" regions
Industries / products	400 industries	200 products (+163 industries on our Premium tier)
Industry classification	BEA	NACE
Base year	2023 (CEDA 2025 release)	2022 (v3.10) / 2025 inflation-adjusted (v3.11)
Update frequency	Annual, inflation-adjusted	Annual as of 2025 (previously less frequent)
Price types	Producer and purchaser price	Producer price only
Currency	USD	EUR
Institutional backing	Selected by PCAF as its preferred model (2025); also used by the US EPA, CDP, and WWF	Widely used in academic and European corporate reporting

A quick note on producer vs. purchaser price (available for CEDA): purchaser price includes taxes and distribution/retail margins, while producer price reflects the price received directly by the manufacturer. Which to use depends on how you buy: purchases direct from a manufacturer typically means producer price, while purchases through a retailer or distributor may be better reflected by purchaser price. When in doubt, producer price is the more conservative choice.

When CEDA tends to be the better fit

Your situation	Why CEDA
You're starting spend-based accounting fresh	No historical footprint to preserve, and no rebaselining needed
You have a global supply chain across many countries	148-country coverage avoids lumping many suppliers into a generic "Rest of World" region
You have detailed manufacturing spend data	400 sectors allow more precise matching for granular procurement data
Your auditor is asking for more recent data	2023 base year with annual updates is more current than older vintages
You do financed-emissions accounting (Category 3.15)	PCAF selected CEDA as its preferred model in 2025
You need purchaser price (e.g. off-the-shelf retail goods)	Only CEDA currently offers factors that include transport and trade margins

When staying on (or choosing) EXIOBASE tends to make more sense

Your situation	Why EXIOBASE
You already have science-based targets (SBTs)	Your baseline was likely built on EXIOBASE; switching means rebaselining, so it's worth planning rather than rushing
Year-over-year comparability is critical for investor/board reporting	Keeping the same methodology preserves consistent trend lines
Your operations are concentrated in the EU	EXIOBASE's coverage and EUR denomination align well with EU-focused supply chains
You're in the middle of an audit	Switching databases mid-audit adds complexity, so it's usually best to finish the audit first, then plan a migration

Understanding: why does my footprint change if I switch databases?

This is the most important thing to know before comparing numbers: spend-based results from different databases are not directly comparable, by design. CEDA and EXIOBASE use different methodologies and sector classifications, so the same spend can produce different emissions estimates in each and can shift your reported footprint up or down.

Because of this, we don't recommend choosing a database based on which one shows lower emissions. The right choice depends on which database's coverage and methodology genuinely fits your supply chain and reporting needs. A few practical implications:

If you have SBTs, a database change may mean rebaselining, so it's worth flagging with your CSM early.
Where possible, we always encourage supplementing spend-based data with activity-based data (actual quantities, distances, or usage); spend-based is the floor of methodological rigor, not the goal.

If you're already using EXIOBASE

If you're already using EXIOBASE and do not want to switch to CEDA, no action is needed to keep your existing calculations running as normal. A couple of things worth knowing:

Existing calculations always stay valid for your internal use, reporting, and compliance, even if you later move to CEDA or stop renewing.
External disclosure of results is fine (e.g. in a sustainability report), as long as the underlying EXIOBASE data itself couldn't be reconstructed from what's shared, and appropriate attribution is included.
If you decide not to continue with EXIOBASE, you simply won't be able to apply EXIOBASE factors to new calculations going forward. Your CSM can help plan a transition to CEDA at that point.

Understanding the impact of a change before deciding

If you'd like to understand what a database change would mean for your reported emissions before committing, we can support this; the scope and turnaround depend on your situation:

If your data is already in Cozero: we can typically provide an assessment (showing emissions before/after, % change by scope and category, and log-entry-level detail) within about a week.
If your data isn't in Cozero yet: this takes longer, at least 2 weeks, and depends on receiving a clean data export from you first.

Your CSM will work with you to scope exactly what's needed (e.g. your full spend-based footprint vs. a specific scope 3 category, and which reporting year), and will loop in our Climate team as needed.

Frequently asked questions

Do I have to remap all my existing activities if my database is updated?
No. If you stay on EXIOBASE, an update to a newer EXIOBASE vintage does not require you to remap your existing activities; they're updated in place. Moving to CEDA is a separate, opt-in step.

What happens to my historical data if I move from EXIOBASE to CEDA?
Moving to CEDA is generally a forward-looking change for new data going forward. If you need historical periods restated (for example, for base-year or SBTi purposes), your CSM and our Climate team can support a one-time recalculation on request; this isn't something that happens automatically for closed reporting periods.

Can I see a side-by-side comparison of both databases before deciding?
We can support this on request, but we'd generally recommend deciding based on which database best fits your business first (coverage, methodology, reporting needs), rather than comparing the resulting numbers, since, as above, the two aren't methodologically comparable. Your CSM can talk through what's feasible for your account.

Is there a cost to using EXIOBASE?
Newer, licensed EXIOBASE data may carry a cost depending on your account and contract. Your CSM can walk you through the specifics.

Who do I talk to about making a change?
Your Customer Success Manager. They'll help you weigh the options and, if you decide to switch, coordinate the mapping and migration with our Climate team.

Questions or Feedback