The Waymark Constraint Index (WCI) · method v1.0
How we judge whether a data-centre project's megawatts are deliverable, and how we print a rating you can check line by line.
1. What the WCI rates
The WCI is our dated opinion of the current severity of constraints on delivery for one named, bounded project (one application or a stated stage), judged against what the public record shows.
It is not a measure of project or company quality, not a forecast, not a rating of the developer or the site, and not investment advice. Direction of travel is shown separately, in each project's verdict box.
There is one rating per project. It reflects the overall picture and is not a sum or an average. Several material issues together can justify a higher level, and one decisive recorded blocker can set the level on its own.
The constraint families we consider are:
- power and connection;
- water and environment;
- permitting and regulation, including the decision-maker and required concurrences;
- the dependency chain (third-party works such as roads or substations);
- implementation status.
Counterparty and demand questions are used only where the proponent, a regulator or an exchange has published its own statement.
2. The scale
Whole numbers only, from 1 to 5. No zero, no decimals, no sub-bands. Each level is tied to what the record shows.
| WCI | Assigned when the public record shows… |
|---|---|
| 1 Minimal | No unresolved adverse position from a required approver, network operator or agency; the remaining steps look routine. |
| 2 Moderate | At least one open issue (for example an agency information request, a council objection or an unconfirmed connection pathway) that could delay a stage, with a published or ordinary route to resolve it. |
| 3 Material | At least one required approval, concurrence or connection step is contested or unresolved, and resolving it would probably change the project's timing, size or design. |
| 4 Severe | A required approver, agency or network operator has stated that the project in its current form does not meet a requirement, or several material issues compound, and no published pathway resolves them yet. |
| 5 Cannot proceed as proposed | Only a recorded withdrawal, refusal, lapse or legal bar, or a published statement by the proponent that it will not proceed. No judgement, however strong, can put a live application at 5. |
3. Decision rules
- Assign the level the cited record best supports. If two levels are genuinely equally supported, we withhold or assign the lower one, and say why.
- Adjacent-level test. Every rating states why not lower and why not higher, each with references. Those reasons must rest on records we opened ourselves (grade V). A rating that rests mainly on secondary sources is withheld.
- Withhold rather than force. We withhold when the evidence is weak, when a source conflict would change the level, when the deciding question is unresolved in the record, when the rating can't be explained in two lines, when it would require overclaiming, or when the project is too early in the record to tell adjacent levels apart responsibly. We always name the next trigger and its date.
- Outcomes. Each review ends in Assign, Revise, Confirm (no change), Withhold, or Not rated. Never "probably a 3".
- Changes. A rating changes only for new evidence, a change in recorded status, the correction of an earlier error (logged as a correction), or a method version change (logged). No silent revisions, and no changes made for narrative effect.
- Firewall. Commercial engagement never raises or lowers a rating. A developer's reply changes a rating only through new evidence or a factual correction.
- Second check. Every WCI 4, every change of two or more levels, and every public rating gets a second review against this method before release.
- Where ratings appear. Ratings of live projects appear in paid briefs only. The free sample carries one worked example on a withdrawn application and one fictional illustration.
4. Who we rate
We rate only a named, bounded project that is durable enough to rate: a lodged application or a government-recorded proposal. Anything earlier prints "WCI: not rated (not yet eligible)".
We rate only large developers that belong to bigger corporate groups. Small or unassociated developers and not-for-profits are described only through cited facts and print "WCI: not rated". Where a developer's group membership isn't yet confirmed in the public record, we print "WCI: not rated (pending)" and name how it will be confirmed. Scope is judged on the developer, not on a consultant or project manager acting as applicant, and we make no assessment of that applicant. We never name or rate individuals.
5. How a rating is printed
Every rating appears on the same page as its reasons:
WCI n · label: our opinion as at [date] · method v1.0 · based on [refs] · not a forecast, not a rating of the developer, not investment advice.
Why not [n−1]: … [refs]. Why not [n+1]: … [refs]. Would change if: …
A withheld rating prints the deciding question, the date, and the next trigger with its date:
WCI: withheld: the deciding question (…) is unresolved in the public record · as at [date] · method v1.0 · next trigger: … ([date]).
6. The three lenses and confidence
Alongside the WCI, each project is assessed through three lenses, each with a call and a confidence level: high, medium or low.
- Power pathway. RESOLVED means published evidence of a signed connection agreement or allocated capacity. OPEN means a connection offer or funded augmentation dated 2030 or earlier. SLIPPING means dated 2030–33, or conditional on unfunded works. UNRESOLVED means no public evidence, or a date after 2033.
- Permission & decision-maker. Where the application stands, which required approvals and concurrences are open, and who the consent authority is.
- People & water. Water and wastewater, cooling, back-up generation and emissions, and local opposition, with units, boundaries, and whether each figure is planned or observed.
7. Evidence grades and silence states
- V: we opened the official or primary document.
- S: a secondary source (press, law-firm briefing, tracker), treated as less certain and used only where official records weren't reachable.
- E: our own illustrative arithmetic, with its assumptions stated.
Every project line carries a silence state: no event, checked, no change (date), stale, or collection failure. No evidence means no upgrade.
8. Versions
Method v1.0 is dated 18 Oct 2026. A minor version (v1.1) tightens wording or evidence rules without changing what a level means. A major version (v2.0) changes what a level means. Ratings issued under an earlier version keep that version label until they are reviewed.
v1.0 replaces the earlier Waymark scale. Each level is now tied to what the public record shows, and level 5 is limited to recorded events. Because that changes what the levels mean, no earlier WCI value is carried over or compared with v1.0 ratings.