Stonewake vs IJGlobal for bank desks
Stonewake vs IJGlobal is a comparison between two different tool classes rather than two rivals in one market. IJGlobal, now part of Green Street Infrastructure, is an established infrastructure journalism, deal data and research service. Stonewake is a newer monitoring platform purpose-built for bank export finance, project finance and commercial real estate desks. A project finance team can subscribe to both without buying the same thing twice.
What IJGlobal offers
IJGlobal's data and news now sit inside Green Street Infrastructure, which describes the combination as IJGlobal's trusted data and exclusive news brought together with Green Street's more than forty years of rigorous, independent research. The published offering spans several pillars: unbiased research across ten key infrastructure sectors, data on deals, firms, funds and market trends with forward-looking company analysis and market forecasts, global news coverage tracking infrastructure and energy finance developments and major transactions, and live league tables for benchmarking market participants. An asset radar for pipeline work draws on IJGlobal's database of 45,000 assets.
The stated audiences are developers, lenders, investors and law firms, using the service to find partners, build pipelines and stay ahead of market trends. IJGlobal's news coverage is presented as tracking infrastructure and energy finance developments and major transactions, and its live league tables benchmark market participants by transaction value and volume.
What Stonewake offers
Stonewake is the newcomer of the pair and occupies a different lane. It is built for bank EF, PF and CRE desks, and its public site describes the job as finding the deals, screening the counterparties and monitoring the risk. Stonewake Monitoring publishes short verified briefs built from public filings and registers: company registers, regulatory filings, procurement notices, official gazettes and statistical releases. Each stated fact must trace to a cited source record, and briefs that fail verification are held back.
The pipeline is rigid by design: facts are extracted deterministically, field by field, the writing step is not allowed to add, remove or alter a fact, and each published brief displays its published and updated dates together with the number of sourced facts it carries. Around the briefs sit country intelligence for 245 jurisdictions with every datum naming its source, screening of organisations and markets, and a glossary of desk terminology. Stonewake does not publish personal data, and it does not employ a newsroom: its briefs are deterministic records of filing events, not journalism.
Stonewake vs IJGlobal as different tool classes
The clean way to read Stonewake vs IJGlobal is by tool class. IJGlobal is market intelligence in the editorial tradition: journalists and researchers covering transactions, participants and trends, with proprietary deal data and league tables built over many years. Stonewake is a filings-monitoring platform: software that records what public registers and official sources state about counterparties and markets, with a verification pass instead of an editorial desk.
Both raise a desk's market awareness, and the vocabulary overlaps naturally, from SPV structures to offtake agreement milestones. The artefacts differ. A league table or an exclusive story is analysis and reporting of the market; a verified brief is a record of a specific public filing. Most PF desks that value one will still recognise the other as a separate job.
When IJGlobal is the better choice
IJGlobal is the better choice when the desk needs the infrastructure market's editorial and data layer: closed-deal history, league tables for benchmarking arrangers and lenders, sector research with a long methodological track record, and news coverage of transactions and market developments written by specialist journalists who know the market's participants. Teams that price, pitch or benchmark against the infrastructure market rely on exactly this class of service, and Stonewake does not claim deal league tables, sector research or an editorial newsroom.
Institutions beyond bank desks, including investors, developers and advisers, are also part of IJGlobal's stated audience, which reflects a breadth of market roles Stonewake does not address. The Green Street side adds forward-looking company analysis, sales comparables and market forecasts to that package, extending it towards investment decisions well past any monitoring product's remit.
When Stonewake is the better choice
Stonewake is the better choice when the job is continuous public-record monitoring of a bank desk's counterparties and markets: verified briefs from registers and filings, country pages stating export credit agency cover, register openness and sanctions-programme status, and organisation-level screening without person data. That job sits closer to credit and risk workflow than to market reading, and it is the gap Stonewake was purpose-built to fill for EF, PF and CRE desks.
Desks that already read the trade press and still track register events by hand are the natural case for adding a monitoring layer. The two products complement each other in a stack: editorial market intelligence for context, filings monitoring for the record, with each covering ground the other's model does not reach.
Pricing and procurement
Neither service publishes pricing on its public site; both are sold through sales contact with quotes arranged per institution. Procurement can settle the split on requirements alone. League tables, deal databases, sector research and market journalism point to IJGlobal within Green Street Infrastructure. Verified filings briefs and country intelligence scoped to bank desks point to Stonewake. Credit metrics such as DSCR covenants remain the bank's own analysis in either case, informed by both classes of intelligence but owned by neither.
Vendor figures in this page are as published on the vendors' own sites, accessed 11 August 2026.