.svg)
DitchCarbon vs Plan A: choosing your Scope 3 solution
Updated 2 September 2026. This comparison is for teams weighing a specialist supplier emissions data platform against an all-in-one carbon and ESG platform. It is factual by design: both products are credible, and the right choice depends on which problem you are solving.
What is Plan A?
Plan A is an all-in-one carbon accounting and ESG platform covering Scope 1, Scope 2 and all fifteen Scope 3 categories, with modules for regulatory frameworks such as CSRD and Germany's Supply Chain Act (LkSG) and a decarbonisation planner for target setting. It is bought by organisations that want carbon and wider ESG reporting managed in one system. If you are evaluating it, Plan A's own documentation is the right source for its current capabilities.
What is DitchCarbon?
DitchCarbon provides verified emissions data for over 2 million organisations, built on primary emissions data wherever it exists, so procurement, sustainability and finance teams can measure and act on supply chain and portfolio emissions from one source. It is a specialist Scope 3 carbon accounting platform: the emphasis is the counterparty data itself, with a source and change history on every figure and coverage gaps shown, not hidden.
How do the two differ?
The honest distinction is breadth against depth on the supplier line. Plan A organises carbon and ESG reporting across the whole organisation, with Scope 3 as one strand of a wider system. DitchCarbon is bought for what the Category 1 number is made of, supplier by supplier, and for keeping that defensible as companies publish and restate.
| Feature | DitchCarbon | Plan A |
|---|---|---|
| Primary focus | Scope 3 supplier emissions data, engagement, and reduction (especially Categories 1 and 2) | All-in-one carbon accounting (Scopes 1, 2, 3) and ESG platform |
| Ideal user | Sustainability and procurement teams working supplier by supplier on Scope 3 | Sustainability managers needing a single tool for broad reporting and compliance |
| Data methodology | Disclosed, supplier-specific figures first, with generic factors visible where nothing is published | A mix of primary data collection, spend-based calculations, and industry averages |
| Key differentiator | Counterparty coverage with a source and change history on every figure | Integrated modules for ESG regulations (e.g. CSRD, LkSG) and Scopes 1 and 2 |
| Outcome | A defensible Scope 3 inventory with the gap ranked for engagement | A consolidated corporate carbon footprint and compliance-ready reports |
When is Plan A the right choice?
When the job is one system for carbon and ESG together: a first footprint across all scopes, CSRD and LkSG obligations handled in the same place, and a sustainability team whose remit runs wider than emissions. If the supplier data question is modest for now, the single-platform shape is a reasonable buy.
When is DitchCarbon the right choice?
When the data is the problem. If Category 1 dominates your footprint and the number behind it is built on industry averages, the gap is not another module. DitchCarbon starts from what suppliers have already published, so the disclosed part of a list is matched and scored before anyone is asked anything, and requests go out prepopulated with what each organisation has already published.
Can you use both?
Yes, and organisations do. In that pairing DitchCarbon is the supplier data layer and Plan A organises the footprint-wide accounting and ESG reporting built on it. The wider version of this decision, specialist data layer against all-in-one suite, is set out on our specialist vs suite page.
See the comparison on your own list
The fastest test is your own file: send a sample of your supplier list to the coverage check and see how much of it already carries a matched, scored figure.
Run the test on your own list.
Tell us what you're assessing and we'll show you the coverage we already hold, before you commit to anything.
