As the importance of energy efficiency and smart readiness in the building sector
has been on the rise, the financial evaluation of smart-ready technologies (SRTs)
remains a gap in this field. This study introduces a methodology that comparatively
evaluates the cost–benefit relationship between 11 different SRTs across three European
countries—Cyprus, Italy and The Netherlands. Key performance indicators (KPIs) for
energy-focused aspects such as Country-Specific Energy Savings Potential (CSESP) and
Seasonal Smart Efficiency Coefficient (SSEC) and financial aspects such as Smart Readiness
Cost Index (SRCI), Labor Cost Impact Factor (LCIF), Return on Smart Investment (RoSI),
and Smart Investment Break-Even Period (SIBEP) were used to quantify the performance
of the SRTs. The results indicate that regional labor rates, energy pricing, and climatic
conditions—as well as relative technology cost–benefit tradeoffs—play a significant
role in the economic viability of smart-ready devices. Having low labor costs and
energy pricing, Cyprus exhibited the most cost-effective outcomes among the three
countries. Italy showed strong returns although the initial investments were higher.
The Netherlands was observed to benefit the most from heating-oriented technologies.
The study comes to the conclusion that regionally specific methods are necessary for
the adoption of SRTs and that techno-economic performance cannot be assessed separately
from local market dynamics. The proposed framework supports stakeholders and policymakers
in smart building investment and planning by offering a scalable method for device-level
benchmarking. These indicators are developed specifically for this study and are not
part of the official EU SRI (Smart Readiness Indicator) methodology. Their inclusion
supports device-level evaluation and complements ongoing efforts toward SRI standardization.
This research directly addresses Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7 on Affordable
and Clean Energy, as well as SDG 11 on Sustainable Development, by evaluating how
smart-ready technologies can contribute to energy efficiency and decarbonization in
buildings. Based on the results, further research is needed to expand the indicator
framework to additional technologies, include building typology effects, and integrate
dynamic factors such as CO2 pricing and real-time tariffs.
