Risk Taxonomy
The EDP Group's risk taxonomy aggregates, from an integrated perspective and in a common language, the various risk mappings existing at the level of the Group's various Platforms and Regions and is structured around five large families: Strategic & ESG, Energy Business, Financial, Counterparty and Operational.

The EDP Group closely monitors and reports risks of a strategic and ESG nature, since it believes that, if they materialise, they could have a significant impact, mainly in the medium and long term. Strategic & ESG risks can be broken down into two distinct natures:
- Strategic
- ESG
Business risks include all the risk factors intrinsically linked to the remuneration of the EDP Group's core business of generating, trading, distributing and supplying energy in the various geographies and markets where it operates. Energy Business risks can be broken down into two distinct types:
- Energy markets
- Regulation
Financial risks include market risk factors complementary to those of the EDP Group's energy business (non-operational) in the various geographies and markets where it operates. Financial risks can be broken down into four different types:
- Financial markets
- Asset rotation
- Liquidity
- Social liabilities
Counterparty risk is related to unexpected changes in the ability to fulfil obligations on the part of customers, as well as energy counterparties, financial counterparties (essentially associated with deposits with financial institutions, financial derivatives, and insurance) and suppliers. Additionally, it also includes “Integrity” to ensure an overarching structure of counterparty risk analysis. Counterparty risks can be broken down into two different types:
- Credit and operational
- Integrity
Operational risks aggregate the risk factors complementary to those of the EDP Group's energy and financial business in the various geographies and markets where it operates, associated with the planning, construction and operation of physical assets, execution of processes, systems, and legal and compliance. Operational risks can be broken down into four different types:
- Physical assets
- Execution of processes
- Systems
- Legal & Compliance
Download the PDF below for a detailed description of EDP Group’s Risk Taxonomy.
EDP’s Top Risks
The top five risks observed for 2026 are: (1) Renewable Production Volumes, (2) Capital Gains on Asset Rotation, (3) Counterparty, (2) Energy Commodities, and (5) Assets in Operation
1 | Renewable Production Volumes | The EDP Group is significantly exposed to fluctuations in renewable energy generation, particularly in hydro volumes, but also in wind and solar. Adverse conditions, such as a dry year and/ or lower wind and solar resources, can negatively affect the company’s financial performance. |
| |
2 | Capital Gains on Asset Rotation | Potential reduction in expected capital gains from asset rotation, driven by a decline in asset values resulting from lower market appetite, rising interest rates, falling energy prices, or adverse exchange rate movements. |
| |
3 | Counterparty | Risk arising from the potential default (or from higher-than-expected level of default) on contractual obligations by customers, energy counterparties, financial counterparties (mainly related to deposits with financial institutions and financial derivatives) and/ or suppliers. |
| |
4 | Energy Commodities | Changes in commodity prices, essentially due to market exposure in Iberia to electricity, coal, gas and CO2 prices, but also in EDPR's other markets (residual exposure not covered by PPA). These variations can stem from multiple factors, namely shifts in supply and demand dynamics or national and international regulatory changes, and may impact the company's results. |
| |
5 | Assets in Operation | Operational and integrity risks affecting in-service assets, including equipment failure, ageing, maintenance gaps, grid constraints, resource variability, and environmental events. These can lead to reduced energy output, higher O&M costs, downtime, accelerated degradation, and end-of-life liabilities, ultimately impacting cash flows and terminal value. |
| |
The quantification of EDP's risks is based on the potential loss in EBITDA, in a P95% scenario, estimated through the application of Monte Carlo simulations. Monte Carlo simulation, through the definition of probabilistic distributions for each risk factor/variable, allows to simulate possible future outcomes; for each simulation, different values are randomly generated for each of the probability distributions of the various risk variables (inputs). The result of a Monte Carlo simulation is a probability distribution, i.e., a representation of the different possible future outcomes and their probability of occurrence.
For each of these risks, EDP Group has carried out a qualitative/ quantitative assessment of their potential financial impact and likelihood. The resulting impact matrix is presented below as the EDP Group Risk Heatmap.

EDP favours risk management based on quantitative analysis and continuous monitoring of the risks that may affect its business. For this purpose, the company regularly carries out sensitivity analyses of financial and non-financial risks, as well as analyses of stressed scenarios, using Monte Carlo analysis, or focusing on some specific stress scenarios. This type of analysis is applied to EBITDA, EBT, NI, FFO/ND and all relevant output variables at group level and broken down by platform, technology, Business Unit, among others.
As an example, each year, EDP Group conducts a sensitivity analysis of various risk factors affecting the budget for the following year, including renewable volume (hydro, wind, solar), electricity price, gas price, electricity demand, inflation, exchange rate, and specific operational sensitivities for different markets, to assess their impact on Group's EBITDA. The impact of variations in certain risk factors on EDP's EBITDA is analysed and presented below:
- Hydro volume: a significant risk factor for EDP given its portfolio and high volatility of the variable, impacting the company's generation capacity. Assuming a price of €60/MWh, a 20% reduction in the expected volume impacts EDP's EBITDA by ≈€70-110m. Notably, EDP's financial performance in 1Q2022 was strongly impacted by the extreme drought in Portugal during the winter of 2021/2022, resulting in ≈30% reduction compared to the historical average hydro production
- Unavailability of assets: assuming an average 1% reduction in the availability of all EDP's generation assets (both conventional and renewable), the impact on EDP would be ≈€30-40m.
EDP faces additional risks beyond the top five already identified. Financial risks include rising interest rates, inflation, currency fluctuations, and liquidity pressures, all of which may impact profitability and capital gains across business segments. Operational risks involve delays in construction and asset development, supply chain constraints, asset damage or unavailability, and legal or compliance uncertainties. The networks segment is exposed to business continuity disruptions from extreme events, as well as uncertainties regarding the timing and terms of low voltage network concessions in Portugal. Furthermore, network operations in Iberia and Brazil are also subject to interest rate, inflation, and exchange rate volatility.
Additionally, liquidity and solvency stress analysis are also carried out to evaluate the company's ability to maintain sufficient liquidity and cash levels in highly stressful situations, considering two different scenarios: (1) a generalised liquidity crisis scenario for one year and (2) a EDP-specific stress scenario for two years. EDP ensures it has available liquidity, in cash and credit lines, to cover these scenarios. Furthermore, an annual climate risk analysis is conducted using three different scenarios, detailed in 2025 EDP’s IAR.
Emerging Risks
In addition to closely monitoring the main risks inherent to the group's activity, the main trends (at global and sectoral level) that may translate into threats and opportunities for the group are also comprehensively mapped, and appropriate mitigation strategies are proactively developed. The mapping of emerging risks is periodically updated, with an assessment by the EDP Group's top, executive and non-executive management. The main emerging risks identified are:
|
|
|
| Description |
| Potential Impacts |
| Mitigation Measures |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geopolitical Tensions at Global Level leading to sanctions/ tariffs and instability in EDP geographies |
|
| Increasing use of economic tools, policies, and sanctions as instruments of geopolitical competition. Instead of traditional warfare, nations leverage trade restrictions, tariffs, currency manipulation, and supply chain disruptions to achieve strategic objectives or assert dominance. Significant risk to the global business environment by creating widespread instability. Escalations between major nations can disrupt trade routes, supply chains, and critical resource access, leading to market volatility and economic uncertainty. |
|
|
|
|
Climate risks: Physical extreme events and precipitation reduction, regulatory transition risks | Adverse effects of climate change include extreme weather events, chronic changes in physical parameters, and the economic, regulatory, social, and technological shifts required for a low-carbon future. |
|
| |||||
Weakening Climate Transition Efforts |
The energy transition is at risk due to declining political support and growing social resistance to new projects, which can delay or reverse key initiatives. Political instability, lack of consensus, and local opposition, often fuelled by misinformation or poor stakeholder engagement, create uncertainty, slow infrastructure deployment, and threaten progress toward sustainable energy and climate goals. |
|
| |||||
Increase in Cyber-attacks |
EDP’s growing reliance on digital infrastructure boosts operational efficiency but increases exposure to cyber risks. While its digital transformation prioritizes cyber resilience, the likelihood of more frequent and severe cyber‑attacks remains significant. |
|
| |||||
Social Risk: Gap in labour market and risk of unavailability of talent for renewable energy companies
| The RES sector is growing fast due to higher demand for clean energy solutions and government initiatives to help the transition to low-carbon economies. The rise in RES industry is expected to create great demand for qualified professionals in engineering, project management, installation and maintenance. Meanwhile, demographic trends show a projected decline in EU’s working-age population and stabilization in US. This demographic shift, along with a projected rise in the need for workers in RES assets (3-4x.by 2030 in EU), is expected to create a global shortage of skilled labour in the green economy, reaching 7 million by 2030, mostly in solar & wind sectors. This shortage of skilled labour is a risk to EDP's BP. The company has ambitious targets for 2026-28, with the aim of deploying approximately 5 gigawatts of additional renewable capacity. It is expected a 90% Employees’ digital upskilling plan completion by 2028. |
|
| |||||
Change in insurance landscape | The insurance landscape is shifting as insurers revaluate coverage in a fast-changing environment. On one hand, increasingly severe natural disasters driven by climate change are leading to higher premiums, stricter exclusions, and reduced availability of coverage for events like floods, wildfires, and hurricanes. At the same time, the escalating frequency and sophistication of cyberattacks are prompting insurers to tighten policy terms, lower limits, and introduce exclusions for specific cyber outcomes (e.g., impact on physical assets). Additionally, heightened regulatory scrutiny and litigation risks related to environmental legal claims (e.g., concentration of chemical components) are causing insurers to reevaluate liability coverage, raising premiums or limiting options for affected industries. |
|
|