Pakistan’s leading listed companies continue to face significant gaps in corporate transparency, particularly in reporting human rights practices, environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and anti-corruption programmes, according to a new assessment by Transparency International Pakistan (TIP). The Transparency in Corporate Reporting Assessment (TRAC) 2026 evaluated 104 public limited companies listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange and recorded an average transparency score of 66.73%, equivalent to 6.67 out of 10. The findings highlight differences in the extent of information companies make publicly available about their governance arrangements, financial reporting, workplace policies and accountability measures. The report also emphasised that comprehensive corporate disclosure is important for strengthening investor confidence, improving public trust and identifying potential governance risks across Pakistan’s corporate sector.
The average score in the latest assessment was lower than the 72.3% recorded in the previous edition, which examined 69 companies. However, the two assessments covered different numbers of companies, meaning the overall averages should be interpreted with the differences in their respective samples in mind. None of the companies assessed in 2026 achieved a perfect overall transparency score. Oil and Gas Development Company Limited (OGDC) ranked among the leading performers with a score of 92.71%, followed by Fauji Cement Company Limited at 91.67% and Sazgar Engineering Works Limited at 91.04%. Their results placed them among the companies disclosing comparatively extensive information across the assessment’s corporate reporting categories. Nevertheless, the broader findings indicate that transparency remains uneven across the listed-company landscape, particularly in areas involving social responsibility and corporate accountability.
Human rights and corporate social responsibility emerged as the weakest reporting category, with an average score of 45.98%. The assessment examined disclosures relating to human rights due diligence, prevention of child labour, employee safety, wage payment mechanisms and procedures for addressing workplace complaints. Only Fauji Cement achieved full transparency in its disclosures within this category, while 11 companies were classified as significantly transparent. The findings indicate that many companies provide limited publicly available information about the systems they use to identify and address human rights concerns and protect employees. The report also pointed to shortcomings in the disclosure of grievance procedures, suggesting that investors and other stakeholders may not always have sufficient information to understand how companies handle complaints or respond to reported workplace problems.
Environmental, social and governance reporting also remained a major area of concern, recording an average transparency score of 47.84%. Such disclosures can provide investors and the public with information about how businesses address environmental responsibilities, workplace issues, governance standards and broader social impacts. However, the assessment found that publicly available reporting in this category was comparatively weak across the companies examined. Anti-corruption programmes recorded an average score of 53.41%, indicating further gaps in the disclosure of corporate measures intended to prevent and address corruption. The report highlighted shortcomings in information about employee training, communication of anti-corruption policies and mechanisms for reporting corruption-related concerns. OGDC, Fatima Fertiliser Company Limited, Pakistan Tobacco Company Limited and Lucky Core Industries Limited recorded the highest scores in the anti-corruption category, distinguishing them from other assessed companies in this area.
In contrast, companies performed strongly in reporting their organisational structures and domestic financial information. Organisational transparency averaged 92.49%, while domestic financial reporting reached 92.50%. Both categories fell within the assessment’s significant-transparency range, indicating that companies generally provided more extensive information about their organisational arrangements and domestic financial activities than about human rights, ESG matters and anti-corruption programmes. The difference between these results highlights an uneven disclosure pattern across corporate reporting categories. While conventional organisational and financial information was comparatively accessible, disclosures concerning social responsibility, workplace protections and ethical business practices were less comprehensive. These differences may affect how easily investors and other stakeholders can assess a company’s broader governance and accountability arrangements using publicly available documents.
The assessment also examined gender equality, non-discrimination and disability inclusion, where companies recorded an average score of 68.11%, reflecting moderate transparency. The report identified weaknesses in disclosures relating to disability inclusion and grievance mechanisms for reporting discriminatory practices. These areas are relevant to understanding whether companies publicly explain their policies for supporting equal opportunities, preventing discrimination and responding to workplace complaints. Without sufficient disclosure, stakeholders may find it difficult to assess the scope of a company’s stated commitments or understand the procedures available to employees who experience discriminatory treatment. The findings therefore indicate that corporate reporting gaps extend beyond financial and anti-corruption matters to include workplace inclusion and the transparency of internal complaint-handling systems.
A comparison of 63 companies included in both the current and previous editions offered a more positive picture of progress. Their average overall transparency score increased from 72.01% to 78.45%, representing an improvement of approximately 8.9%. According to Transparency International Pakistan, the improvement reflected better performance on assessment questions that remained unchanged between the two editions. This comparison provides a more consistent basis for examining changes over time than comparing the overall averages for the two different company samples. It suggests that companies assessed in both editions made progress in certain areas of public disclosure, even as the wider 2026 assessment identified substantial gaps across the full group of 104 listed companies.
The TRAC 2026 assessment relied on publicly available information, including companies’ latest annual reports for 2024 and 2025, official websites and other public documents. It examined eight areas of corporate disclosure: anti-corruption programmes, organisational transparency, country-by-country reporting, domestic financial reporting, procurement relating to government contracts, human rights, gender and disability inclusion, and environmental, social and governance disclosures. Transparency International Pakistan clarified that the assessment measures the extent of information companies disclose rather than whether they effectively implement the policies they report. Consequently, a low score does not by itself establish unethical conduct, while a high score does not guarantee that stated policies are implemented effectively in practice. The distinction is important when interpreting the findings, as transparency scores indicate the availability of information rather than providing a direct measure of corporate behaviour.
The report stressed that stronger corporate disclosure can support investor confidence, improve public trust and help reduce governance risks. For Pakistan, where corruption concerns and challenges in revenue mobilisation remain significant, clearer reporting practices could also help demonstrate corporate accountability and improve access to information for investors, employees and other stakeholders. The findings suggest that companies have greater scope to strengthen disclosures concerning human rights, workplace protections, ESG responsibilities and anti-corruption systems. More comprehensive reporting would allow stakeholders to evaluate not only financial performance and organisational structures but also the policies and mechanisms businesses say they use to manage ethical and social responsibilities. While the improvement among companies assessed in both editions indicates progress, the wider results show that consistent and comprehensive corporate transparency remains an important area for Pakistan’s listed companies.
Follow the PakBanker Whatsapp Channel for updates across Pakistan’s banking ecosystem.