The study confirms that there is widespread duplication of effort, fragile business models, and similarity of value propositions. In particular:

Impact Finance platform data is not shareable:
Taxonomies for deals, impact metrics, and meta-groupings such as the SDGs are inconsistent at best, and incoherent at worst.

Platforms are not sufficiently interoperable:
Only 32% of platforms responded ‘yes’ to having an Application Programming Interface(API).

Platforms are not replicable:
47% have custom built technology, and only 32% have a licensing model.

Platforms are not generally viable:
53% cannot cover their operating expenses, and 61.5% are funded by grants.

Without exception, platforms surveyed are constrained by outmoded ideas of data ownership, and are at imminent risk of disintermediation. Further, underperforming and failed platforms evidence a number of consistent patterns, including:

• Transaction-fee models cannot achieve sufficient volume, despite having solved the complexities of regulation and compliance.
• Contextually focused membership models cannot achieve sufficient volume to meet the high costs of curation
• Universal impact finance platforms underestimate trust as the essential currency for achieving efficient scale in an online-only platform.

The survey results suggest that platform stakeholders understand the altruistic and commercial imperative to collaborate, but are functionally or financially incapable of advancing this understanding.

Market fragmentation is not only ineffective, it is unconscionable; and the path to rationalisation and course-correction is binary - centralise, or federate.

Regardless of which path is chosen, the desired outcomes are essentially the same, moving us more rapidly toward an effective approach to the SDGs through:

• Increased innovation liquidity
• Increased deal liquidity
• Increased operational effectiveness throughout the sector

Despite these observations, the survey highlighted a desire for increased collaboration, especially in the areas of technology, pipeline development, and compliance.

Collaboration is a core value.

The survey response rate of 23% is significantly higher than industry average of 10-15%, suggesting a willingness to work together.

Collaboration is highly desirable.

A significant majority of respondents (91%) indicated a willingness to explore deeper interoperability.

Collaboration is highly actionable.

In addition to existing licensors, 32% are leveraging external platform data, and 50% are preparing to, or willing to use it.

Advancing beneficial outcomes is the entire focus of the impact finance ecosystem. So it inevitably begs the question, is there a more effective way to harness the skills, resources, and talents within it to greater effect?

Connecting the various platforms into a more cohesive whole will have the following key benefits:

• support finance seekers in attracting funding more quickly
• connect funders directly to opportunities that match their investment thesis
• help existing platforms to refine, focus, and leverage their unique offerings.

Our prototyping around SDG6 suggests that platforms are willing to share data as long as the value proposition is clear.

This means aggregating, curating, refining, and sharing every deal, with every prospective funder on the planet.

And doing so in a manner that supports global regulatory compliance, deal syndication, and appropriate sharing of fees.