Environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting is widely regarded as a mechanism for reducing information asymmetry between firms and their stakeholders, particularly under the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). However, regulatory compliance does not necessarily ensure high informational quality. This study examines the extent to which information asymmetry persists within ESG reporting prepared in accordance with ESRS. Using a qualitative case study design, a screening-based methodological framework is applied to a publicly available and externally audited ESG report. Information asymmetry is assessed across four dimensions: disclosure completeness, content specificity, verifiability, and truthfulness, using a weighted scoring model. The findings indicate that while many disclosures exhibit low or negligible information asymmetry, medium and, in isolated cases, high levels persist, particularly in areas related to financial impacts of sustainability risks. The results suggest that formal ESRS compliance and external assurance do not fully eliminate informational imbalances.