When looking at the mid-point of Fastmarkets BeZero REDD+ assessments, there is a strong correlation between ratings and price, with AA rated projects at 4.75 times the price of C rated. This follows across all the rating bands currently assessed by Fastmarkets, with an average 55% uplift in the price-per-rating increase between C and BBB.

But there is also a wider range of project-specific factors that can be at play, leaving much more variation in the high and low prices achieved.

BeZero rates carbon projects on an 8-point scale from AAA at the top to D at the bottom on the likelihood of it achieving one tonne of CO2e avoided or removed per credit issued.

AA rated driven by Katingan

Prices for REDD+ BeZero AA rated projects stood at $8.10-8.50 per tCO2e in the week to Wednesday July 23, supported by firm demand for Katingan (VCS 1477) credits.

Prices for vintage 2020 credits from the project have risen sharply from $4.50-5.00 per tCO2e at the start of the year, partly supported by an increase in rating to AA from A in February as well as extremely tight supply.

Katingan has not issued any credits since 2022 following a moratorium put in place by Indonesia.

The Indonesian government is beginning to resume the international sale of credits, but projects like Katingan will likely have to wait until Verra and the Indonesian government are able to reach a mutual recognition agreement.

Market participants currently expect this to be signed in the coming months, with offers already in the market for vintage 2021-2022 credits from Katingan for potential fourth-quarter delivery.

These newer vintage credits have recently been offered below where vintage 2020 credits have been trading in the secondary market, indicating that the emergence of new supply of high quality REDD+ credits could place a cap on pricing, Fastmarkets understands.

The current specifications for Fastmarkets’ BeZero assessments sets a minimum vintage of 2020 as well as volumes of between 5,000-50,000 tCO2e. This means that some fluctuation in pricing is likely expected as and when projects issue newer vintage credits, especially from those that have not yet issued vintage 2020 credits.

Project specific impacts

Offers for Kasigau Phase 1 (VCS 612) vintage 2021 credits have been hovering around $3.40 per tCO2e in recent weeks, with this project supporting the lower end of the BBB rated assessment.

Secondary market prices for the project dropped after Verra put it on hold and initiated a review in November 2023, but prices struggled to recover even after it was reinstated a few months later in February 2024.

During the process, the project was put on ratings watch by BeZero but was later reaffirmed at a BBB.

Some market participants have told Fastmarkets that given the recent integrity and quality concerns in the market, participants can be quick to react to negative news or allegations but slow to move back the other way.

This has led prices for projects like Kasigau well below the levels achieved by some of the BB rated projects — such as Tambopata (VCS 1067) — highlighting there is still a lot of variation in project pricing even within rating bands.

It is similar for BB rated projects, with the low end propped up by Mai N’Dombe (VCS 934) credits, which are pricing below mid-point levels for B and C rated credits.The project has an abundance of earlier vintage credits, with over 14.4 million tCO2e pre-vintage 2020 still circulating issued unretire — just under 50% of issued volumes, or 13 million tCO2e of these credits have been retired.

It’s a slightly different picture for vintage 2020+ credits from Mai N’Dombe, with large retirements removing nearly all vintage 2021 supply from the market. This has had a fairly minimal impact on pricing, however.

Shell and Eni have retired large volumes of vintage 2020 credits from the project, including 1.37 million tCO2e between December 2024 and February 2025, equivalent to 36% of the total vintage issuance.

Over that time period, however, offers for vintage 2020 credits from Mai N’Dombe actually decreased from $0.80 per tCO2e to $0.60 per tCO2e, highlighting that sometimes traditional supply and demand factors don’t always play in the VCM.

During the same period, Eni also retired 98% of vintage 2021 credits from the project, further restricting availability of newer vintages.

In the following months, buying interest increased, with vintage 2020 bids rising from $0.35 per tCO2e at the start of the year to $0.85 per tCO2e over the past week. Just over 1 million tCO2e of vintage 2020+ credits from the project are currently circulating.

These price levels also highlight a divide between the primary and secondary markets, with primary sales generally achieving prices multiple times higher than those of the secondary.

Higher ratings, greater retirements

In general, higher rated REDD+ projects have also registered a larger proportion of retired credits.

AA rated projects have an average lifetime retirement rate of around 85%, but that falls to just under 50% for D rated projects.

This is also observed in newer vintage 2020 or above credits, with AA rated projects registering a retirement rate of 78% compared to around 8% for C rated projects. So far, no D rated projects have issued credits from 2020 onward.

This is not the case for B rated REDD+ credits, however, which have logged a higher retirement rate compared to BB or BBB rated projects on both a lifetime and vintage 2020+ basis.

There are some project-specific factors at play in this, with Mataven (VCS 1566) seeing large volumes of its retirements from domestic Colombian companies, while Eni has made up over 60% of retirements from the Luangwa (VCS 1775) project.

Buyers increasingly seeking higher quality REDD+

Buyer preference for higher rated credits can also be observed in end-user demand, with the average rating of retired REDD+ credit steadily increasing over time.

In 2018, the average REDD+ credit retired was between a B and BB, while so far in 2025 the average REDD+ retirement was from projects rated just below BBB.

This increase has been driven by a large rise in retirements from top rated projects. In 2025, 26% of retirements from BeZero rated REDD+ projects were AA compared to less than 7% in 2018.

There has also been a steady fall in retirements of lower rated projects, with C-rated REDD+ credits falling to just a 4% share in 2025 from 11% in 2018. Over the same period, the proportion of B rated credits fell sharply from 64% to 14%.

On the issuance front, the average rating has held relatively steady on either side BB over a similar period. These numbers, however, are slightly skewed by a lack of issuances from higher rated AA projects such as Katingan and Rimba Raya (VCS 674) in Indonesia in recent years.

REDD+ issuances are also notoriously “lumpy”, with some developers issuing multiple different vintages in one go, while long timeframes and registry delays can affect when developers are able to bring new credits to market.

Though this does point to a potential tightening of higher quality supply with buyers consistently retiring credits of higher quality than what is entering the market over the past six years. As can be observed with projects like Katingan, when this supply tightens, it can further help support the price of higher quality credits in the market.

Corporates less likely to put their name against lower quality REDD+

When retiring credits, end users or corporates have the option to disclose their name as the retiring entity or keep it anonymous. Within the REDD+ space, buyers have more often than not been willing to publicly disclose what credits they are retiring.

Within BeZero rated REDD+ projects, between 60-70% of all retirements have been named since 2018. There is a lot more noise when looking at REDD+ projects yet to be rated, with named retirement rates varying wildly between less than 30% and over 80% since 2018.

Some market participants have reported to Fastmarkets that corporates, particularly smaller or less sophisticated ones, can be more comfortable sourcing projects where they can point to a third party, independent rating, and could explain the relatively steady named retirements rates against rated projects.

Over the past few years corporates have shifted to putting their name against higher rated REDD+ projects. Back in 2016, the average named REDD+ retirement represented a project just above a C rating, but the average rating has risen to almost BBB in 2025.

As the market shifts to address integrity and quality concerns that have been raised over the past few years, buyers have in general been more cautious in the credits they have been sourcing, explaining this increased demand for higher quality projects.

Developers, buyers looking toward VM0048

In the background, much of the market is also looking towards Verra’s new VM0048 REDD+ methodology. The update will bring in jurisdictional baselines that will be set by Verra and is likely to lead to cuts in issuance volumes.

BeZero analysis of provisional risk maps in four Brazilian states showed the transition to the new methodology would result in “substantial reductions” in credit issuances. Similar analysis by Abatable put a figure of potentially up to 30-90% cuts depending on project location.

The new methodology has also received approval from the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) under its Core Carbon Principles (CCPs). The combination of reduced issuances and a CCP-tag are likely to push developers and sellers to look for higher prices to offset lower volumes.

At the same time, market participants are also keeping an eye on what the new methodology could mean for REDD+ ratings, given the haircuts should help to address some potential overcrediting concerns.