Flood, Drought & Wildfire Resilience KPIs by Sector
Essential KPIs for evaluating physical climate risk resilience, with 2024-2025 benchmark ranges for adaptation investments, insurance, and loss prevention across sectors.
Physical climate risks—floods, droughts, and wildfires—are no longer future scenarios. Insured losses from natural catastrophes exceeded $100 billion in 2024 for the fifth consecutive year. The gap between economic and insured losses grew to $200+ billion annually. Organizations across sectors face mounting pressure to measure, disclose, and manage these risks. This benchmark deck provides the KPIs that matter for resilience evaluation, with ranges drawn from 2024-2025 implementations across sectors.
The Resilience Imperative
Climate-related physical risks are accelerating faster than most organizations have adapted. Swiss Re estimates that climate change has increased expected annual losses by 30-40% over the past decade. Asset concentrations in high-risk areas continue growing despite known hazards.
TCFD and ISSB requirements now mandate physical risk disclosure. Investors increasingly incorporate climate risk into valuations—properties in high-risk zones are beginning to show price discounts. Insurance availability is contracting in vulnerable regions (California wildfire, Florida flood), forcing risk retention or non-insurance.
Understanding resilience KPIs enables organizations to: assess current exposure, prioritize adaptation investments, demonstrate risk management to stakeholders, and maintain access to insurance and capital markets.
The 8 KPIs That Matter
1. Asset-at-Risk Exposure
Definition: Value of assets in high-hazard zones as percentage of total portfolio.
| Hazard Type | High-Risk Threshold | Moderate-Risk | Acceptable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flood (Coastal) | 100-year floodplain | 500-year zone | Above 500-year |
| Flood (Riverine) | 100-year floodplain | 500-year zone | Above 500-year |
| Wildfire | High/Very High WUI | Moderate WUI | Low/None |
| Drought | High water stress (>40%) | Medium (20-40%) | Low (<20%) |
| Sector | Typical High-Risk Exposure | Leading Practice |
|---|---|---|
| Real Estate | 15-35% of portfolio | <10% with mitigation |
| Utilities | 25-50% of infrastructure | <20% with hardening |
| Agriculture | 30-60% of operations | Diversified sourcing |
| Manufacturing | 10-25% of facilities | <8% critical facilities |
| Financial Services | 20-40% of loan exposure | Sector limits applied |
2. Adaptation Investment Rate
Definition: Annual spending on resilience measures as percentage of asset value or revenue.
| Investment Level | % of Asset Value | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Leading | >0.5% annually | Proactive, comprehensive |
| Adequate | 0.2-0.5% annually | Major risks addressed |
| Minimal | 0.05-0.2% annually | Compliance-driven |
| Insufficient | <0.05% annually | Reactive only |
| Measure Type | Typical Cost | Risk Reduction |
|---|---|---|
| Flood Barriers (Permanent) | $200-800/linear foot | 80-95% loss reduction |
| Flood Barriers (Deployable) | $50-200/linear foot | 60-80% loss reduction |
| Wildfire Defensible Space | $5,000-25,000/property | 50-80% structure survival |
| Building Hardening (Wildfire) | $15,000-60,000/property | 70-90% structure survival |
| Drought (Water Efficiency) | $10-50/m³ saved | Varies by baseline |
| Nature-Based Solutions | $10-100/m² | Co-benefits included |
3. Insurance Coverage Ratio
Definition: Percentage of potential maximum loss covered by insurance or other risk transfer.
| Coverage Level | % PML Covered | Implications |
|---|---|---|
| Full Coverage | >90% | Low residual risk |
| Substantial | 70-90% | Manageable retention |
| Partial | 40-70% | Significant self-insurance |
| Minimal | 20-40% | Major balance sheet risk |
| Uninsured | <20% | Full risk retention |
| Region/Hazard | Current Coverage | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| US Flood (Commercial) | 60-75% | Stable |
| US Flood (Residential) | 25-40% | Declining |
| California Wildfire | 45-65% | Declining sharply |
| Europe Flood | 50-70% | Stable to increasing |
| Drought (Crop) | 50-70% | Expanding |
Coverage contraction: In high-risk areas, insurers are non-renewing policies or dramatically increasing premiums. Organizations must assess whether coverage will remain available at acceptable cost.
4. Business Continuity Capacity
Definition: Ability to maintain operations during and after climate events.
| Continuity Level | Recovery Time | Revenue Protection |
|---|---|---|
| Resilient | <24 hours | >95% maintained |
| Prepared | 1-7 days | 80-95% maintained |
| Adequate | 1-4 weeks | 60-80% maintained |
| Vulnerable | 1-3 months | 40-60% maintained |
| At Risk | >3 months | <40% maintained |
Critical capability gaps:
- Backup power: Only 30-40% of commercial buildings have generator backup
- Water independence: <10% of facilities have >3 days water storage
- Supply chain alternatives: 25-35% have documented alternate suppliers
- Remote work capability: 60-80% (post-pandemic improvement)
5. Early Warning and Response Time
Definition: Lead time between hazard warning and protective action completion.
| Hazard | Typical Warning Time | Required Response Time |
|---|---|---|
| Flash Flood | 0-6 hours | <2 hours for evacuation |
| Riverine Flood | 1-7 days | <24 hours for barrier deployment |
| Hurricane/Typhoon | 3-7 days | 24-72 hours for preparation |
| Wildfire | 0-48 hours | <6 hours for evacuation |
| Drought | Weeks-months | Seasonal water planning |
| Heat Wave | 3-7 days | 24-48 hours for vulnerable populations |
| Preparedness Level | Response Capability | Organizations Achieving |
|---|---|---|
| Automated Response | Systems trigger automatically | 5-12% |
| Rapid Manual | <4 hour activation | 20-30% |
| Planned | <24 hour activation | 40-55% |
| Ad Hoc | Variable, event-dependent | 25-35% |
6. Nature-Based Solution Integration
Definition: Percentage of resilience approach incorporating green infrastructure.
| NbS Approach | Flood Reduction | Co-Benefits |
|---|---|---|
| Wetland Restoration | 10-30% peak flow | Habitat, water quality |
| Urban Green Space | 5-20% runoff | Heat reduction, amenity |
| Riparian Buffers | 15-35% flood attenuation | Erosion, habitat |
| Forest Management | 20-50% wildfire intensity | Carbon, biodiversity |
| Managed Retreat | 100% exposure elimination | Ecosystem restoration |
| Sector | NbS Integration Rate | Cost vs. Gray Infrastructure |
|---|---|---|
| Municipal | 15-30% of projects | 40-60% of gray cost |
| Real Estate | 5-15% of developments | 30-50% of gray cost |
| Utilities | 8-18% of resilience spend | 50-70% of gray cost |
| Agriculture | 20-40% of adaptation | Often lower |
7. Supply Chain Resilience Score
Definition: Assessment of climate risk exposure across supply chain.
| Dimension | Weight | Assessment Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Geographic Concentration | 25% | Single points of failure, regional exposure |
| Supplier Risk Assessment | 20% | Tier 1-2 supplier hazard mapping |
| Alternative Sourcing | 20% | Documented backup suppliers |
| Inventory Buffer | 15% | Days of supply for critical inputs |
| Transport Redundancy | 10% | Alternative logistics routes |
| Communication/Visibility | 10% | Real-time supply chain monitoring |
| Risk Level | Score | Prevalence |
|---|---|---|
| Resilient | 80-100 | 8-12% |
| Prepared | 60-79 | 20-28% |
| Exposed | 40-59 | 35-45% |
| Vulnerable | <40 | 20-30% |
8. Disclosure and Reporting Quality
Definition: Comprehensiveness of physical risk disclosure per TCFD/ISSB requirements.
| Disclosure Element | Current Adoption | Best Practice |
|---|---|---|
| Asset-Level Hazard Screening | 45-60% | Multi-hazard, forward-looking |
| Scenario Analysis (Physical) | 25-40% | Multiple scenarios, quantified |
| Adaptation Measures Disclosed | 30-45% | Costs and effectiveness included |
| Financial Impact Quantification | 15-25% | Material impacts valued |
| Supply Chain Risk Assessment | 10-20% | Tier 1-2 coverage |
Regulatory pressure: CSRD requires physical risk assessment for in-scope companies. SEC climate rules include physical risk disclosure. Quality varies widely—most disclosures remain qualitative.
What's Working in 2024-2025
Community-Scale Flood Resilience
Cities implementing comprehensive flood management achieve better outcomes than property-by-property approaches. Copenhagen's Cloudburst Management Plan combines gray infrastructure (tunnels, retention) with green infrastructure (parks, permeable surfaces) to handle 100-year rainfall events.
Key metrics: $1.5 billion investment, 300+ projects, designed for climate-adjusted 100-year storm. Cost-benefit ratio estimated at 1.8:1 including avoided damages and co-benefits.
Parametric Insurance for Uninsurable Risks
Where traditional insurance is unavailable or unaffordable, parametric products that pay based on physical triggers (rainfall levels, wind speeds) are filling gaps. African Risk Capacity provides sovereign-level drought coverage. Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility covers hurricane losses.
Parametric products enable rapid payouts (days vs. months) but require careful trigger design to avoid basis risk.
Managed Retreat Programs
Rather than repeated rebuilding, some jurisdictions are buying out properties in high-risk zones. New York's post-Sandy buyout program in Staten Island acquired 600+ properties, converting land to open space. Harris County (Houston) has acquired 3,000+ flood-prone properties since 1985.
Economic analysis shows buyouts cost 60-80% of repeated flood damage over 30-year horizons while eliminating ongoing risk.
What Isn't Working
Underestimating Non-Stationary Risk
Historical experience no longer predicts future hazards. Many organizations assess risk using backward-looking data that doesn't account for climate change. A "100-year flood" based on historical records may now occur every 25-50 years. Forward-looking, climate-adjusted risk assessment is essential but rare.
Insurance Spiral in High-Risk Areas
As premiums rise and coverage contracts, property values should theoretically decline—but this adjustment is delayed and incomplete. Many property owners face sudden uninsurability rather than gradual price signals. California and Florida exemplify the problem: insurers exiting, state backstops strained, property markets continuing.
Adaptation Deficit
Global adaptation finance is estimated at $30-50 billion annually versus the $300-500 billion needed. The gap is especially acute in developing countries and for nature-based solutions (which receive <5% of adaptation finance despite cost-effectiveness).
Key Players
Established Leaders
- Swiss Re — Leading reinsurer for catastrophe risk modeling and parametric insurance.
- Munich Re — Global reinsurer with climate risk analytics and natural disaster coverage.
- ICEYE — SAR satellite constellation for flood monitoring. Raised $65M Series E.
- Aon — Climate Risk Consulting for corporate and government resilience planning.
Emerging Startups
- Pano — AI-powered wildfire detection for 250+ first responder agencies. $89M total funding.
- Technosylva — Catastrophic weather simulation and wildfire risk analysis.
- FloodFlash — Parametric flood insurance with IoT sensors for rapid claims.
- Kettle — AI-powered reinsurance for wildfire risk.
Key Investors & Funders
- General Atlantic BeyondNetZero — Climate growth equity fund backing Technosylva.
- Giant Ventures — $44M investment in Pano wildfire detection.
- Climate Investment Funds — $12.5B pledged for climate resilience globally.
Examples
Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance: Partnership across NGOs, research institutions, and communities achieving documented flood resilience improvements. Metric: communities show 20-50% reduction in post-flood recovery time. Approach: combines early warning systems, community preparedness, and nature-based solutions. Cost: approximately $50-100 per beneficiary per year.
City of Melbourne Urban Forest Strategy: Comprehensive urban cooling program to address heat island effect and drought resilience. Target: increase canopy cover from 22% to 40% by 2040. Co-benefits: reduced cooling costs, improved air quality, stormwater management. Investment: $50 million over 10 years for 3,000 new trees annually.
PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoffs: Utility-scale wildfire risk management through proactive de-energization during extreme fire weather. Results: reduced ignition risk but significant economic disruption ($100M+ per event). Evolution: undergrounding, sectionalization, and enhanced weather monitoring to reduce PSPS frequency.
Action Checklist
- Complete asset-level physical risk screening across all material hazards
- Quantify potential maximum loss under climate-adjusted scenarios
- Assess insurance coverage adequacy and future availability
- Develop business continuity plans for high-probability climate events
- Evaluate nature-based solutions for cost-effective multi-benefit resilience
- Map supply chain exposure to physical climate risks
- Establish early warning systems and response protocols
- Report physical risks per TCFD/ISSB requirements with quantified impacts
FAQ
Q: How do I prioritize which physical risks to address? A: Develop a risk matrix combining probability (frequency) and consequence (financial impact). Address high-probability, high-consequence risks first. Consider cascading risks—a drought may cause wildfire, which causes mudslides, which cause floods. Don't ignore low-probability, catastrophic risks that could threaten organizational survival.
Q: What's the business case for adaptation investment? A: Calculate avoided losses versus investment cost over relevant time horizons. Include: direct damage avoided, business interruption prevented, insurance savings, access to capital/insurance markets maintained. Typical adaptation investments show benefit-cost ratios of 2:1 to 10:1 depending on context.
Q: How should we handle locations that may become uninsurable? A: Options include: (1) self-insurance through captives or reserves; (2) risk transfer through parametric products; (3) risk reduction through hardening investments; (4) managed divestment from highest-risk locations. The appropriate strategy depends on asset mobility, alternative locations, and organizational risk tolerance.
Q: Should we rely on government flood/wildfire protection? A: Public infrastructure provides baseline protection but may not meet your specific risk tolerance. Assess: maintenance levels, design standards (often based on historical climate), and upgrade plans. Plan for failures—levees breach, fire breaks fail, reservoirs empty. Layer private resilience on top of public protection.
Sources
- Swiss Re Institute, "Natural Catastrophes in 2024: Sigma Report," 2025
- Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), "Status Report 2024," October 2024
- World Resources Institute, "Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas," 2024 Update
- First Street Foundation, "Risk Factor: National Physical Climate Risk Assessment," 2024
- Copenhagen Climate Adaptation Plan, "Cloudburst Management Implementation Report," 2024
- National Institute of Building Sciences, "Mitigation Saves: Natural Hazard Mitigation Cost-Benefit Study," 2024 Update
- UNEP, "Adaptation Gap Report 2024," November 2024
Related Articles
Case study: Flood, drought & wildfire resilience — A startup-to-enterprise scale story
How organizations scale climate resilience from early-stage pilots to enterprise-wide programs, with proven frameworks and ROI metrics from leading platforms.
Playbook: adopting Flood, drought & wildfire resilience in 90 days
A step-by-step rollout plan with milestones, owners, and metrics. Focus on KPIs that matter, benchmark ranges, and what 'good' looks like in practice.
Deep dive: flood, drought & wildfire resilience — the fastest-moving subsegments to watch
the fastest-moving subsegments to watch. Focus on a leading company's implementation and lessons learned.