Data centre and digital infrastructure fund reporting
Data centres are now a core institutional allocation, but they report unlike traditional property. Here is what investors ask for and why the data, not the formulae, is the hard part.
Why data-centre portfolios are a reporting challenge
Data centres and digital infrastructure have become a core institutional real estate allocation, but they report unlike traditional property. Income mixes long hyperscale leases with shorter colocation and power arrangements; revenue can be tied to capacity and power, not just space; capital intensity is high and lumpy; and assets often sit across operators, jurisdictions and currencies.
That makes the portfolio-level picture — consolidated, validated, comparable — genuinely hard to assemble. Investors still expect institutional-grade reporting on cash flow, value and risk, on time and with an audit trail.
The metrics investors ask for
The real-estate financials still apply: net operating income, rental loss, yield and cap rate, and capital expenditure intensity, which is unusually high for this asset class. WAULT is a particular selling point — hyperscale leases are often very long, so a strong WAULT is a headline durability metric. Debt metrics such as DSCR and LTV matter given the capital intensity.
Operational indicators sit alongside these — utilisation and contracted-versus-available power, and efficiency measures such as PUE — but those are operator-reported and belong to the facility, not the fund's financial reporting. The investor-facing job is to bring the financial and contractual data together reliably. See the full set in our key metrics guide.
ESG: where the scrutiny really lands
For data centres, ESG is not a footnote — it is the sharp end of investor and regulator scrutiny. Power draw, energy source, water used for cooling, carbon intensity and grid impact are front of mind for anyone allocating to the sector, and increasingly feature in SFDR, GRESB and EU Taxonomy reporting.
The data for all of this originates with operators and meters, not the fund. The fund's job — and its difficulty — is pulling that energy and carbon data together with the financials into consistent, auditable reporting. That is a consolidation-and-reporting problem, and it is exactly where a governed data layer helps: STREETS brings validated ESG data alongside the financial KPIs at portfolio level, without claiming to meter or model energy itself. See ESG data and reporting for real estate funds.
Where the data problem bites, and how STREETS helps
The difficulty is rarely the formulae; it is consolidating rental, financial and contractual data from multiple operators and systems into one validated dataset, then reporting on it consistently to investors and boards. Done in spreadsheets, it is slow, hard to audit and easy to get wrong.
STREETS is the governed data and reporting layer for exactly this: it ingests structured data from the systems and operators a digital-infrastructure fund already uses, validates it, consolidates it to portfolio level, and produces reporting — without replacing the operational systems underneath. The asset class is newer; the reporting problem is the same one STREETS is built for.
See these numbers produced automatically
STREETS consolidates validated data and produces portfolio KPIs and reporting without a rebuilt spreadsheet each cycle. Book a walkthrough on your own portfolio.
Book a Demo