The case for multi-market optimization

Flexibility continues to play a central role in electricity systems with growing shares of renewable energy generation and increasing EV adoption. Although recent market outcomes have shown lower revenue margins in balancing markets compared to previous years, driven by factors such as increased competition and lower-than-expected demand (due to the PICASSO initiative), this does not signal a loss of opportunity. Instead, recent trends indicate a shift toward more integrated and multi-market trading strategies. The outlook is that relying on a single revenue stream, such as pure day-ahead arbitrage or imbalance trading, can lead to higher volatility in returns.

Revenue maximisation for flexible assets typically requires participation across multiple value streams, such as:

• Frequency Containment Reserve (FCR)
• Automatic Frequency Restoration Reserve (aFRR)
• Imbalance & intraday markets
• Day-ahead market
• Integration with on-site consumption and decentralized production

These developments reflect ongoing market maturation rather than a structural loss of value. This maturation is expected to improve revenue stability over time, and future price levels are estimated to recover and stabilise from 2026 onwards.

System imbalance will remain structural

Even with further institutional initiatives to manage system-wide imbalance, imbalance cannot be fully eliminated. This is due to the continued growth of renewable energy capacity and the deployment of electrical vehicles, both of which complicate energy forecasting. This imbalance will continue to require flexible assets to restore system balance.

Maximising flexibility returns through grid cost optimisation

Grid-related costs are becoming an increasingly important component of the flexibility business case. Over the last few years, the need for substantial investments in the grid infrastructure have resulted in increases of network tariffs.

It is clear that a significant part of the economic value of flexibility comes from avoiding grid-related costs, such as limiting peak demand (thereby reducing peak charges) and aligning trading strategies with tariff structures. Moreover, for certain sub-metered and front-of-the-meter (FTM, or standalone) battery configurations, reduced grid fees can be requested, potentially lowering grid charges by up to 40%.

Since these optimisations are location- and tariff-dependent, selecting the right EMS partner and strategy is crucial to maximising the return on your grid connection. At BeLoaded, we evaluate these opportunities on a case-by-case basis and provide customised energy storage solutions, delivering load-balancing designs based on the client’s needs.

From our perspective, the most effective approach combines multi-market trading strategies with behind-the-meter optimisation (if applicable). Moreover, BeLoaded supports clients in conducting grid studies with the network operator and, when relevant, in negotiating optimal energy contracts.

A positive outlook

How flexibility and trading strategies are integrated into the overall electricity system is becoming increasingly important. Value is captured by those who coordinate self-consumption optimisation with market participation, while remaining mindful of rising grid fees. This approach reduces reliance on any single revenue stream and creates a more resilient business case.