For many years, property was valued using very clear parameters: location, floor area, building class, architecture, tenants, occupancy and lease terms.

These still matter today. Location is not going away. Tenant quality will also remain a key indicator. But I believe we are approaching a point where this will no longer be enough.

In ten years, two buildings that look identical may have different values, not because of their façades or floor areas, but because one has a clear digital operating history, while the other has only an attractive presentation and a folder of design documentation.

A building is gradually becoming more than a collection of square metres. It is beginning to accumulate its own engineering biography.

Equal floor area no longer means equal value

Imagine two office buildings. They are in the same district, have similar floor areas, the same classification, healthy occupancy levels and roughly equal rental income.

At first glance, these assets look similar. But look deeper and the difference can be enormous.

One building has hourly energy consumption records, proper system-level metering, clear central monitoring and control, a fault archive, a service history, open protocols, control logic and data on actual comfort conditions.

The other has only an overall electricity bill, several different contractors, proprietary controls, manual operating modes, lost settings and dependence on someone who ‘remembers how it works’.

On paper, these may be two buildings of the same class. But from a future investor’s perspective, they are already two different assets.

A building begins to develop its own history

We tend to think of a building’s history as its year of construction, refurbishments, changes of ownership and list of tenants. But its future history will go much deeper.

It will include actual energy consumption, building services operating modes, recurring failures, service quality, temperature stability, ventilation performance, the building’s response to peak loads and its ability to adapt quickly to change.

In other words, a building will have not just a construction history, but an operational history.

That history will show whether the property is genuinely efficient or merely appears efficient at the point of sale.

The market will gradually move from promises of efficiency to verification of actual building performance.

A digital passport is more than bureaucracy

When digital building passports, energy certification, monitoring, operational records or reporting are discussed, many owners see them as yet another administrative burden.

I understand this reaction. In our market, any new requirement often looks like another document, another form, another signature and another reason for a compliance check.

But viewed through an investor’s eyes, the logic is different. A building’s digital history is a way to reduce uncertainty.

When buyers see not just a promise of savings but years of system operating records, they understand better what they are buying. When they see not just the chiller brand but actual operating modes, costs, faults, servicing and upgrades, they can value the asset more accurately.

Data does not replace floor area. But it can explain why some square metres are worth more than others.

Investors will buy more than a building

Imagine selling an office building in ten years’ time. Buyers will no longer limit their questions to floor area, occupancy and rental rates. They will want to understand how predictable the property is.

How much does it cost to operate one square metre? Can ventilation, cooling, heating, lighting, pumps and tenant areas be monitored separately? Is there a proper fault and service history? Can actual energy efficiency be verified? Is it easy to integrate new control algorithms?

They will also ask whether the building is ready for future upgrades. Can new sensors be connected without rebuilding the entire controls system? Can intelligent analytics be introduced? Can operating modes be changed without a chaotic series of manual interventions?

In effect, investors will assess more than the property itself. They will assess the quality of the building services infrastructure that supports it every day.

AI will widen this gap

Artificial intelligence in buildings does not start with an attractive interface. It starts with data. And this is where a major difference between properties will emerge.

A building that has spent ten years recording temperatures, loads, faults, schedules, consumption and equipment operation will have very different analytical potential. It already has a memory.

A building where everything was operated manually, data was not stored and settings were lost after every service visit will be starting almost from scratch.

In ten years’ time, competitive advantage will come not only from equipment, but from a building’s memory of its own operation.

Global manufacturers are already showing the way

Just look at the direction the largest HVAC market players are taking. They are already talking about more than compressors, heat exchangers and fans.

They are talking about digital services, remote monitoring, analytics, integration, energy management, equipment life cycles and managing a building as a single system.

This is an important signal for developers and owners. If manufacturers are investing in data and controls, future competition will not be limited to equipment brands. It will be between buildings capable of using that equipment intelligently.

A developer’s costliest mistake

It seems to me that many new properties are still designed as though the main objective were simply to bring the building into use: obtain the documentation, hand over the space, let tenants move in and close out the construction phase.

But a building’s real life begins after it is brought into use. That is when it either accumulates value or gradually loses it.

If metering, open controls, proper central monitoring and control, data retention logic and provision for upgrades are not planned from the outset, in ten years’ time this will be more than a minor technical issue. It will be a limitation of the asset.

In future, a building without data will look like a car without a service history: everything seems to be there, but confidence is lower.

Key takeaway

I am almost certain that the meaning of ‘modern building’ will change over the next decade.

It will be judged not only by its location, architecture and tenants, but also by how transparently it operates, how measurable its efficiency is, how controllable its building services are and how easily it can be upgraded.

So in ten years’ time, there really will be no identical buildings. Even if they stand side by side, have the same floor area and similar façades.

One building will offer history, data, predictability and confidence. The other will offer only assumptions.

Building services are no longer simply a matter of equipment. They are becoming a question of an asset’s future value.

How to check the building services history today

There is no need to wait for a new property valuation standard. When taking over or buying a property, you can ask to see one specific episode from its operational history:

  • What problem occurred, when it was recorded and what data supported the identified cause.
  • What was changed in the equipment or algorithm, and where the current version of the settings is stored.
  • How the outcome was verified and whether any unresolved limitations remain.
  • Whether a new team can find this information without calling the previous engineer.

This is a practical check of data accessibility and consistency, not a guarantee of the asset’s future price. A digital building passport, with someone responsible for keeping it up to date, helps preserve this history.